Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35315920›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2022

Association of Music Interventions With Health-Related Quality of Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

J Matt McCrary, Eckart Altenmüller, Clara Kretschmer, Daniel S Scholz

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
15.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

J Matt McCraryInstitute of Music Physiology and Musicians' Medicine, Hannover University of Music, Drama and Media, Hannover, Germany.
Eckart AltenmüllerInstitute of Music Physiology and Musicians' Medicine, Hannover University of Music, Drama and Media, Hannover, Germany.
Clara KretschmerInstitute of Music Physiology and Musicians' Medicine, Hannover University of Music, Drama and Media, Hannover, Germany.
Daniel S ScholzInstitute of Music Physiology and Musicians' Medicine, Hannover University of Music, Drama and Media, Hannover, Germany.
Hanover University of Music Drama and Media · DEUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Increasing evidence supports the ability of music to broadly promote well-being and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). However, the magnitude of music's positive association with HRQOL is still unclear, particularly relative to established interventions, limiting inclusion of music interventions in health policy and care. Objective: To synthesize results of studies investigating outcomes of music interventions in terms of HRQOL, as assessed by the 36- and 12-Item Health Survey Short Forms (SF-36 and SF-12). Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (searched July 30, 2021, with no restrictions). Study Selection: Inclusion criteria were randomized and single-group studies of music interventions reporting SF-36 data at time points before and after the intervention. Observational studies were excluded. Studies were reviewed independently by 2 authors. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were independently extracted and appraised using GRADE criteria (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) by multiple authors. Inverse-variance random-effects meta-analyses quantified changes in SF-36 mental and physical component summary (respectively, MCS and PCS) scores from preintervention to postintervention and vs common control groups. Main Outcomes and Measures: SF-36 or SF-12 MCS and PCS scores, defined a priori. Results: Analyses included 779 participants from 26 studies (mean [SD] age, 60 [11] years). Music interventions (music listening, 10 studies; music therapy, 7 studies; singing, 8 studies; gospel music, 1 study) were associated with significant improvements in MCS scores (total mean difference, 2.95 points; 95% CI, 1.39-4.51 points; P < .001) and PCS scores (total mean difference, 1.09 points; 95% CI, 0.15-2.03 points; P = .02). In subgroup analysis (8 studies), the addition of music to standard treatment for a range of conditions was associated with significant improvements in MCS scores vs standard treatment alone (mean difference, 3.72 points; 95% CI, 0.40-7.05 points; P = .03). Effect sizes did not vary between music intervention types or doses; no evidence of small study or publication biases was present in any analysis. Mean difference in MCS scores met SF-36 minimum important difference thresholds (mean difference 3 or greater). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, music interventions were associated with clinically meaningful improvements in HRQOL; however, substantial individual variation in intervention outcomes precluded conclusions regarding optimal music interventions and doses for distinct clinical and public health scenarios.

Indexed as

MusicQuality of LifeHealth SurveysHumansMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID35315920
PMCPMC8941357
OpenAlexW4220949797

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.