↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Art therapy for people with dementia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
30 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
519 Mendeley
Title
Art therapy for people with dementia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011073.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sunita R Deshmukh, John Holmes, Alastair Cardno

Abstract

Art therapy is defined by the British Association of Art Therapists as: "a form of psychotherapy that uses art media as its primary mode of communication. Clients who are referred to an art therapist need not have experience or skill in art. The art therapist is not primarily concerned with making an aesthetic or diagnostic assessment of the client's image. The overall aim of its practitioners is to enable a client to change and grow on a personal level through the use of art materials in a safe and facilitating environment". Historically, drawings and paintings have been recognised as a useful part of therapeutic processes within psychiatric and psychological specialties, and this has been acknowledged within medical and neurology-based disciplines.Arts-based therapies are generally considered as interventions managing manifestations of dementia, as they may help to slow cognitive deterioration, address symptoms related to psychosocially challenging behaviours and improve quality of life. To review the effects of art therapy as an adjunctive treatment for dementia compared with standard care and other non-pharmacological interventions. We identified trials from ALOIS - the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register - on 12 May 2014, 20 March 2015, 15 January 2016, 4 November 2016, and 4 October 2017. We also handsearched the grey literature and contacted specialists in the field and authors of relevant reviews or studies to enquire about other sources of relevant information. All randomised controlled trials examining art therapy as an intervention for dementia. Two review authors independently extracted data. We examined scales measuring cognition, affect and emotional well-being, social functioning, behaviour and quality of life. We found two studies that met the inclusion criteria, incorporating data on a total of 60 participants (from 88 randomised), in experimental groups (n = 29) and active control groups (n = 31). One study compared group art therapy with simple calculation activities over 12 weeks. The other study compared group art therapy with recreational activities over 40 weeks. It was not possible to pool the data for analysis from the included studies, due to heterogeneity in terms of differences in the interventions, control treatments and choice of outcome measures.In both studies there were no clear changes reported between the intervention group and the control group in the important outcome measures. According to GRADE ratings, we judged the quality of evidence for these outcome measures to be 'very low'. There is insufficient evidence about the efficacy of art therapy for people with dementia. More adequately-powered and high-quality studies using relevant outcome measures are needed.

Timeline
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 519 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 513 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 78 15%
Student > Master 71 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 56 11%
Researcher 47 9%
Student > Postgraduate 25 5%
Other 61 12%
Unknown 181 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 93 18%
Psychology 64 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 53 10%
Social Sciences 33 6%
Arts and Humanities 18 3%
Other 68 13%
Unknown 190 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,496,078
of 26,106,397 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,033
of 13,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,438
of 351,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#62
of 215 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,106,397 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 351,599 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 215 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.