Public Art & Health
Publications and overlap
Why the record count is not a count of independent studies.
Record, publication and study
A record is an editorial summary. It may cite several sources, and one publication may appear in several records. A review contains other studies, while different papers may use the same participants. Counts in the library and evidence map refer to records, not independent studies or participants.
78 stable records · 2 confirmed shared-publication groups · A total unique-study count has not been established.
Foster et al. (2025): scoping review
These five records cite the same review. PAH-026 also cites a separate accessibility paper. The 2026 correction belongs to this review and is not a new study. The underlying studies included by the review have not been matched against every other record.
Karnik, Printz & Finkel (2014): Cleveland Clinic
Both records cite the same 2014 paper. PAH-024 also mentions a 2021 paper; PAH-033 also discusses a 2024 institutional survey. Those additional sources are not treated as the same study. Participant overlap has not been established.
Shared cohort, distinct papers
PAH-045 · PAH-046 — English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). Different outcomes; participant overlap has not been quantified.
Scope of this check
This pass compared the citations already listed in the records, DOI/PubMed identifiers and source URLs. It is bibliographic reconciliation, not a new appraisal of effectiveness or a full-text re-review. Multi-source records and studies included within reviews still need further matching. Absence of a link does not establish independent participants.
Reconciliation updated: 29 September 2026. Existing record IDs and links are preserved.