The need for robust critique of arts and health research: the treatment of the Gene Cohen et al. (2006) paper on singing, wellbeing and health in subsequent evidence reviews.

BACKGROUND: This paper considers weaknesses in a study by Cohen et al. (2006) on the impacts of community singing on health. These include high demand characteristics, lack of attention to attrition, flawed statistical analysis, and measurement. Nevertheless, the study is uncritically cited, in evidence reviews, with findings taken at face value. METHODS: Google Scholar, SCOPUS and BASE citation functions for Cohen et al. identified 32 evidence reviews in peer-reviewed journals. Eleven of these reviews, published between 2010 and 2023, focused on creative arts interventions. RESULTS: We demonstrate limitations in the Cohen et al. research which undermine the conclusions they reach regarding the health benefits of group singing. Subsequent evidence reviews take the findings at face value and offer little critical commentary. DISCUSSION: We consider what is needed to improve evidence reviews in the field of creative arts and health research. CONCLUSIONS: A more robust approach is needed in reviewing research evidence in the field of arts and health. The Cohen et al. paper is not suitable for inclusion in future evidence reviews.

Physiological changes related to 10 weeks of singing for lung health in patients with COPD.

BACKGROUND: Singing for Lung Health (SLH) was non-inferior to physical exercise training in improving 6-minute walking test distance (6MWD) and quality of life (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)) within a 10-week pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programme for COPD in our recent randomised controlled trial (RCT) (NCT03280355). Previous studies suggest that singing improves lung function, respiratory control and dyspnoea, however this has not yet been convincingly confirmed. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the impact of SLH on physiological parameters and the associations with achieving the minimal important difference (MID) in 6MWD and/or SGRQ. METHODS: We conducted post hoc, per-protocol analyses mainly of the SLH group of the RCT, exploring associations with 6MWD and SGRQ results by stratifying into achieving versus not-achieving 6MWD-MID (≥30 m) and SGRQ-MID (≤-4 points): changes in lung function, inspiratory muscle strength/control, dyspnoea, and heart rate response using logistic regression models. Further, we explored correlation and association in achieving both 6MWD-MID and SGRQ-MID (or in neither/nor) using Cohen's κ and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Test. RESULTS: In the SLH study group (n=108), 6MWD-MID was achieved by 31/108 (29%) and in SGRQ by 53/108 (49%). Baseline factors associated with achieving MID in either outcome included short baseline 6MWD and high body mass index. Achieving 6MWD-MID was correlated with improved heart rate response (OR: 3.14; p=0.03) and achieving SGRQ-MID was correlated with improved maximal inspiratory pressure (OR: 4.35; p=0.04). Neither outcome was correlated with significant spirometric changes. Agreement in achieving both 6MWD-MID and SGRQ-MID was surprisingly insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: This explorative post hoc study suggests that SLH is associated with physiological changes after short-term PR for COPD. Future physiological studies will help us to understand the mechanisms of singing in COPD. Our study furthermore raises concern about poor agreement between subjective and objective benefits of PR despite state-of-the-art tools.

Use of Singing for Lung Health as an alternative training modality within pulmonary rehabilitation for COPD: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a cornerstone in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. However, PR adherence is generally low, and barriers include availability, economic issues, motivation and an inability to attend or perform physical training. Therefore, alternative, evidence-based PR activities are required. Singing may have benefits for quality of life (QoL), respiratory control and well-being in COPD, but the impact on the PR key outcome, physical exercise capacity, is uncertain. METHODS: In this randomised controlled trial (NCT03280355), we investigated the effectiveness of 10 weeks of PR, including either "Singing for Lung Health" (SLH) training or standard physical exercise training (PExT). The primary outcome was a change in exercise capacity (6-min walk distance (6MWD)) from baseline to post-PR. Secondary outcomes were changes in QoL (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS), lung function, dyspnoea and adherence. RESULTS: We included 270 COPD patients, and 195 completed the study. Demographics across groups were comparable, and both groups improved significantly in 6MWD and SGRQ score. SLH was non-inferior to PExT in improving 6MWD (mean±sd 13.1±36.3 m versus 14.1±32.3 m, p=0.81; difference 1.0 m, 95% CI -7.3-9.3 m) with 21.8% and 25.0%, respectively (p=0.57), reaching the 6MWD minimal important difference of 30 m. We found no significant between-group differences concerning SGRQ, HADS, lung function, dyspnoea or adherence. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that SLH is non-inferior to PExT in improving 6MWD during a 10-week PR programme. Future studies addressing reproducibility, long-term effects and health economics are needed.

Heterogeneity in Danish lung choirs and their singing leaders: delivery, approach, and experiences: a survey-based study.

OBJECTIVES: Singing is considered a beneficial leisure time intervention for people with respiratory diseases, and lung choirs have gained increasing attention. However, there is no available guideline on preferred methodology, and hence, outcomes, delivery, and benefits are unclear. The present study investigated for the first time ever emerged delivery, approach, and experiences in Danish lung choirs and their singing leaders, hypothesising the array to be heterogeneous, without disease-specific approach, and a challenging field to navigate for the singing leaders. SETTING: An online survey comprising 25 questions was performed individually, May 2017, in Denmark. PARTICIPANTS: Current singing leaders of Danish lung choirs, identified by hand searches on the internet. In total, 33 singing leaders in formal and informal settings were identified and 20 (67%) responded. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Distribution in content, delivery, and approach; level of disease-specific knowledge and modification; experience of challenges and benefits. Quantitative variables were counted, and an inductive content analysis approach was used for the qualitative study component. RESULTS: The lung choirs were heterogeneous concerning setting, duration, and content. The approach was traditional without disease-specific content or physical activity. Most singing leaders held various academic degrees in music, but lacked skills in lung diseases. However, they experienced lung choirs as a highly meaningful activity, and reported that participants benefited both musically, psychosocially, and physically. Singing leaders were enthusiastic regarding potentials in the 'arts-and-health' cross-field and experienced an expansion of their role and overall purpose, professionally as well as personally. However, they also experienced insecurity, inadequacy, and isolation, and requested methodological guidelines, formal support, and peer network. CONCLUSION: Danish lung choirs are led without any disease-specific guideline or methodological approach. Further studies are needed to develop and distribute a preferred methodological approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study is linked to clinical trial number NCT03280355 and was performed prior to data collection and results of the clinical trial.