ArticleFrontiers in medical technology2023
Accessible art in healthcare facilities: exploring perspectives of healthcare art for visually impaired people.
Article in Frontiers in medical technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring and optimizing spatial accessibility to emergency medical services with a focus on age-based spatial variations in EMS risk.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The effects of viewing visual artwork on patients, staff, and visitors in healthcare settings: A scoping review.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Art in healthcare facilities shows promising results in improving patients' health and well-being and, as such, meets the WHO's definition of health technology. Yet, it remains unclear if healthcare art equally benefits all users. Given the growing number of visually impaired people (VIP), it is valuable to determine whether healthcare art is accessible to VIP and to explore strategies for improving it. Methods: This study employed a mixed methodology, which included (1) secondary research of 25 cases of healthcare art programmes to identify the presence of accessible art in healthcare facilities and the practices that influence it; (2) review of thirty-one Health Building Notes and four supplementary British guidelines on healthcare art to discover if the accessibility of art is required and identify which recommendations influence it; and (3) interview surveys of healthcare art practitioners from three London NHS Trusts to identify opportunities to increase arts accessibility. Results and discussion: The evidence showed that healthcare art programmes were mostly inaccessible to VIP. Most healthcare art programmes did not involve VIP in the commissioning process and, thus, lacked procedures that could facilitate accessibility. There were not enough recommendations in the healthcare facility guidelines to support the accessibility of arts for VIP. The recommendations on artwork in healthcare facility guidelines could increase accessibility if particular conditions were met. Interviews with NHS trusts in London revealed numerous opportunities to improve arts accessibility for healthcare art programmes.
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.