Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39152691›Full record

ReviewSociology of health & illness2025

The social value of place-based creative wellbeing: A rapid review and evidence synthesis.

Rafaela Neiva Ganga, Laura Davies, Kerry Wilson, Margherita Musella

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sociology of health & illness, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Rafaela Neiva GangaLiverpool Business School, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9163-0013
Laura DaviesLiverpool Business School, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
Kerry WilsonSchool of Humanities and Social Science, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
Margherita MusellaSocial Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

Arts and Humanities Research CouncilSpirit of Twelve
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Creative well-being is an increasing field of interest to which biomedical and social sciences have made uneven contributions. The instrumental value of culture and its subsequential public investment is grounded in the interplay of social, cultural and economic capital to attain and preserve wellbeing and health and foster social mobility. The current evidence addresses the effectiveness of arts interventions in improving illnesses. Little attention has been paid to the social value of creative wellbeing for the general population. This paper is a rapid review and evidence synthesis that aims to answer the question, 'What is the social value of place-based arts and culture interventions at individual (wellbeing) and community (social inequalities) levels in the UK and Europe?'. After a systematic search of five databases, search engines, and a call for evidence in August 2022, 14 out of 974 sources met the inclusion criteria. Studies were organised into three themes (Community, Events, Museums), and outcomes were analysed considering the indicators and dimensions of wellbeing (Office for National Statistics). The review evidenced that creative wellbeing leads to improvements in wellbeing outcomes and can contribute to alleviating social determinants of health. However, considering their impact on the underlying causes of structural social inequalities requires caution.

Indexed as

CreativitySocial ValuesArtEuropeHumansSocial Determinants of HealthSocioeconomic FactorsUnited Kingdomarts & wellbeingcreative healthcultural mega‐eventsplace‐based art interventionssocial capitalsocial inequalitiessocial value

Identifiers

PMID39152691
PMCPMC11684509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.