Trial reportThe Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry2023
A co-produced online cultural experience compared to a typical museum website for mental health in people aged 16-24: A proof-of-principle randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The role of receptive arts and culture to improve anxiety, depression and psychological distress in young people: a realist review.Frontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Exploring Engagement With and Effectiveness of Digital Mental Health Interventions in Young People of Different Ethnicities: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Article
- Digital Mental Health Interventions for Young People Aged 16-25 Years: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Anything goes for participant, patient and public involvement in youth mental health research.JCPP advances · 2024Article
- No decision about me, without me: Collaborating with young people in mental health research.JCPP advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to compare a co-produced online intervention encompassing the diverse human stories behind art and artefacts, named Ways of Being (WoB), with a typical museum website, the Ashmolean (Ash) on negative affect (NA), positive affect (PA) and psychological distress (K10).
methodsIn this parallel group RCT, 463 YP aged 16-24 were randomly assigned, 231 to WoB and 232 to Ash.
resultsOver the intervention phase (an aggregate score including all post-allocation timepoints to day-five) a group difference was apparent in favour of WoB for NA (WoB-Ash n=448, NA -0.158, p=0.010) but no differences were detected for PA or K10 and differences were not detected at week six. Group differences in NA in favour of WoB were detected in specific subgroups, e.g. ethnic minorities and males. Across participants (from both groups) mean K10 and NA improved between baseline and six weeks despite increased COVID-19 restrictions. Trial recruitment was rapid, retention high and feedback positive with broad geographical, occupational and ethnic diversity.
conclusionsOnline engagement with arts and culture has the potential to impact on mental health in a measurable way in YP with high unmet mental health needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.