2018
DOI: 10.1080/17454832.2018.1491612
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A constructive-critical response to Creative Health: The Arts for Health and Wellbeing (July 2017) by the All–Party Parliamentary Group on Arts, Health and Wellbeing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There are, however, signs of a recent resurgence of critical questions about arts and health. The APPG report has been criticised by Phillips (2019) for its lack of ideological clarity and weak treatment of the published evidence base. Clift (2020) has critically reviewed the WHO (2019) report.…”
Section: Developments In Arts and Health Since 2006mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are, however, signs of a recent resurgence of critical questions about arts and health. The APPG report has been criticised by Phillips (2019) for its lack of ideological clarity and weak treatment of the published evidence base. Clift (2020) has critically reviewed the WHO (2019) report.…”
Section: Developments In Arts and Health Since 2006mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, the before-after comparison design lacked a control group. As addressed by Phillips [ 32 ], a more rigorous formative assessment of the creative health works, along with a comprehensive review of existing evidence, is needed. A second issue is the small sample size, as suggested by a change in student ratings about the ACT workshop not reaching statistical significance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is important, for example, that when considering fidelity of the intervention in a cluster RCT that participants should receive the same core, active components across all sites. There is additional debate as to whether it is appropriate to instrumentalise the arts and subject them to scientific standards, due to the perception that art and science are disparate fields with conflicting priorities [ 58 ]. However, the potential for arts-based interventions to address unmet needs and improve the quality of life for people with limited access outside of the healthcare context, should arguably be a higher priority [ 57 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%