ArticlePloS one2025
The effects of viewing visual artwork on patients, staff, and visitors in healthcare settings: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surface microbial dynamics and residual diversity in patient rooms with wooden and painted walls.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Optimizing Radiology Workflow: A Multilevel Approach From Department Design to Workstation Ergonomics.Cureus · 2026Review
- Correction: The effects of viewing visual artwork on patients, staff, and visitors in healthcare settings: A scoping review.PloS one · 2026Article
- From function to wellbeing: healing design strategies in contemporary outdoor fashion.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- The effects of viewing visual artwork on patients, staff, and visitors in healthcare settings: A scoping review.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe integration of visual art in healthcare settings has been demonstrated to contribute to well-being. However, the impact of visual arts in healthcare has been primarily evaluated among patients. Viewing visual art could be a health resource to a greater number of people in healthcare settings, including patients, staff, and visitors.
methodsWe conducted a scoping review to synthesize literature on the impact of viewing visual artwork among patients, staff, and visitors in healthcare settings related to the reported outcomes of well-being, wellness, and belonging. The review was informed by Arksey and O'Malley and Joanna Briggs Institute frameworks with masked pairs of reviewers. Included studies were in English, with no restrictions on geographical settings or publication dates. Nine academic databases and twelve gray literature sources were searched, in addition to a hand search and global call for submissions.
resultsFrom an initial 25,222 records, 68 publications met inclusion criteria across 20 locations. 35 were peer-reviewed studies and 33 constituted gray literature. Included publications that reported sample sizes reflected a total of 6,006 participants with the majority being patients (3,133) followed by staff (1,343), visitors (32), and other/unspecified participants (996). Reported outcomes for patients indicated that visual arts in hospitals reduced heart rates, improved reported mental health outcomes, increased well-being, and provided a positive distraction. Reported outcomes for healthcare staff included an increased well-being, belonging, and capacity to prioritize patient needs. Reported outcomes for visitors consisted of an improved experience in healthcare environments and increased well-being.
conclusionsOur synthesis of evidence indicates that integration of visual arts within healthcare settings has positive outcomes for its viewers. Our findings are useful to promote the generation of evidence that can reliably inform the design and experience of healthcare environments.
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.