Abstract
This study examines factors affecting how people integrate live music (concert) experiences into their self-care, specifically related to improvements in mood. Our team investigated conditions of how music delivery affects listeners’ experience and level of engagement based on influential factors. We partnered with Carnegie Hall Weill Institute faculty as we sought to learn about conditions affecting music listening, alone or with others, and how prior concert attendance influences the extent to which attending current music concerts might improve the mood of attendees. We studied factors influencing well-being through instituting Wellness Concerts called “Sound Journeys.” Overall 314 participants enrolled, and many were recruited from the general population of New York City. Some of the participants included patients from Mount Sinai Health System who had depression and attended sessions weekly at our clinic: children, teens, post-NICU (Neonatal Internsive Care Unit) adults and older adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). Our program included a series of six concerts designed to improve the mood among the attendees of live music performances. The content was matched to meet the ages of the attendees. Our research group consisted of musicians and music therapists who surveyed the attendees prior to and immediately after the live, in-person performances. There was a significant positive change in the participants’ mood in relation to concert attendance. As live music concerts involve a relationship between listeners (audience) and performers (musicians), we also surveyed the performers after each performance. Although social prescribing is increasing globally, the unique potential for live music experiences planned with understanding of the influential elements that influence perception is not well described. The capacity to improve wellbeing of audience members is an interesting proposition with little research to date. We are hopeful that our findings will encourage future studies that seek to define how live music concerts impact people’s mood and meet their quest for wellness.
Keywords
Introduction
Social prescribing has been widely implemented in the UK and is growing steadily in countries worldwide. Yet, as a recent comprehensive report reflects: “Social prescribing incorporates an array of relationships and social programmes in a variety of community, health, environmental and digital contexts” (Dingle et al., 2025). This makes it difficult to contextualize a single kind of music when assessing various modalities within the social prescribing of concerts.
Musical care “refers to the role of music—music listening as well as music-making—in supporting any aspect of people’s developmental or health needs” (Spiro and Sanfilippo et al., 2023, pp. 2–3). As such, and intended to be a distinct mechanism of community involvement, we set up concerts with the intention of serving those most in need. As concerts are already a significant resource in most of our inner city’s calendars, and patients within our clinics and hospitals so often desire music, we aimed to have the concert attendance easily accessible and melded into our patients’ schedules. When patients we recommended did not attend, we opened the concerts to those seeking wellness community activities in the general public. We shifted our learning to include surveys with preliminary questioning, related to “how social prescribing programmes are resourced, and how methods and outcomes are implemented to measure the effectiveness of social prescribing programmes” (Dingle, 2025, p. 4), which seemed to target needed areas that supported our investigation.
Probing questions about the music prompted our thinking into how social prescribing of music might function, such as: When would be the best concert time and at what location (accessibility)? Furthermore, we questioned the kind of music that would be most advantageous to audience members, and we worked to seek answers that would help us understand topics related to the concert conditions, such as acoustics, convenience, reason for attendance, and other topics we could not easily identify in the literature that we thought might affect the context of the social prescribing of music concerts.
We had no theoretical framework per se for how we would apply music concerts to our groups. As outlined in the Dingle, et al. (2021) study, we were interested in how music activities affect health and well-being. We were supported by the National Endowment for the Arts to address a population with much need—namely patients with depression. As we started this study, we were disappointed that only a portion of our cohorts with depression who committed to attend actually showed up at the concerts, which prompted us to think more deeply about the systems, funding, convenience, and cultural content of the music that we had designed according to the ages of attendees we were originally targeting.
Social Prescribing
Social prescribing is “a means for trusted individuals in clinical and community settings to identify that a person has non-medical, health-related social needs and to subsequently connect them to non-clinical supports and services within the community by co-producing a social prescription—a non-medical prescription to improve health and well-being and to strengthen community connections” (Muhl et al., 2024, p. 288).
Even so, people involved in the delivery of healthcare environments are paying attention to music’s influence and its impact in the care of those facing chronic diseases. Reports consider the arts as an essential element of care and are focused on the significant role that the arts may play in the creation of a healthy society, especially in treating depression. This first part of our AMEND (Assessment of Music Experiences in Navigating Depression) study looked at the potential of social prescription and its impact on achieving wellness in several vulnerable populations using specifically designed music concerts to meet the needs of our population. We partnered with Carnegie Hall Weill Institute to develop Wellness Concerts as our first step to learn about several of the most influential factors affecting how people may integrate concert experiences into their self-care. While social prescribing is growing amongst international communities (Redmond et al., 2019), few studies have analyzed how/if participants’ music history and reason for attendance affects their perceptions of prescribed live concerts, though such inquiries are growing in inclusivity (Warran et al., 2022).
This constitutes not only the content but the context of how social prescribing is set up. “Loneliness, housing instability and metal health have been defined as areas of need” (Morse et al., 2022) that social prescribing may benefit. However, merely putting out fulfillment opportunities is short-sighted regarding designing programs and toolboxes for a population such as those with depression, whose needs are diverse and complex.
As a conceptual model with committed intentions for enhancing the delivery of health through enhanced social interventions, social prescribing, and most particularly music, has grown in its implementation in healthcare communities, and the research and definition of need has bolstered our understanding of its complexities, prompting careful re-thinking in the implementation of its use.(Mayer & Gaschke, 1988) We hope this study serves as a baseline in defining how music performance can influence broader aspects important to attendees while addressing issues formerly addressed in the literature (Husk et al., 2016)
Within the broad scope of social prescribing programs, the arts including music activities and experiences form a major type of modality (along with nature, exercise and physical activities, and educational classes) that can provide therapeutic opportunities. There is clear evidence that engagement with the arts produces health and well-being outcomes for participants via a range of psychosocial mechanisms (Jensen et al., 2024; Dingle et al., 2025). Having had experience working with community members with dementia in collaboation with Lincoln Center, our team had had experience developing music experiences post concerts, which had seemingly helped attendees make sense of the music they had heard. (Loewy et al 2020) We wondered, however, just how music activities affect health and wellbeing? A scoping review of studies examining psychosocial mechanisms outlines many of the ways this has been attempted. However, little of this research has focused on live music events such as concerts and on how concerts are best designed to optimize effects on audience members’ mood.
The survey information we collected helped us learn about how people integrated concert experiences into their self-care. From both the attendees’ and performers’ perspectives in the study, we predicted that the moods of the performers and audiences would be similar, and they were. Both groups’ moods improved in general from experiencing music engagement.
Sound Journey Setup
Carnegie Hall Weill Institute as our partners, worked with us to initiate this new program supported by the National Endowment for the Arts, as we developed several performance events that were aimed to intentionally promote mindfulness and wellbeing. These concerts offered participants an innovative way of benefiting from music, which aimed to build community through shared experiences of silence and sound. Some of the performance events included guided exercises pre–music sharing, to center participants and encourage deep listening as a strategy to cope with depression. Varying mindfulness practices and other strategies were incorporated within the music performances depending on the interests of the community and the facilities where they were based. Each introduction of the music was followed by an inspiring and transporting live performance, culminating in an optional interactive discussion about the experiences of the audience/participants with the artists. In this way, we addressed the possible scenarios that would be “most likely to support genuine transformation, namely, what can music do that the world needs” (Johnson, 2024).
To have a deeper understanding of how Wellness Concerts affect vulnerable and general populations, we worked with Carnegie leaders to explore the interplay between musical performances and perceptions of our health. This interplay may be critical for self-care and the care of our loved ones. We also worked with our partners in the community—Cooper Union College and Third Street Music School—and invited people who came to our clinic for depression as well as members of the general public to attend the strategically planned concerts. We created surveys that would reveal participants’ listening patterns and experience of music as we implemented several genres and sought to gain insights about the influence of how attendees experienced these varieties of sounds. Our performances targeted children, teens and college students, Post-NICUparents, and older adults with MC). We analyzed the progression of concerts and along the way, as a team, discussed how we could modify our setup of the performance spaces to create the optimal wellness outcomes. We used survey data of concert attendees and included performers’ surveys as we think this is a critical aspect of how music is delivered and perceived. We believe the performers’ self-reflection inherently influences how music performances are expressed and absorbed.
Our teams met after each concert to discuss how the conditions of forthcoming concerts could be improved. In addition to presenting our survey findings collectively in this article, we will provide a breakdown of the surveyed groups by age, to reflect attendees listening background inclusive of:
- where concert attendees access music most often and for what purpose - concert attention/purpose activity in the past: invitational, required, etc. - participants’ perceptions of the Wellness Concert pre- and post-performance (Appendixes A and B) - how and if their attendance ratings were influenced by listening behaviors developed from their past—for example, how they usually listen to music (alone or with others) - access to the concert (convenience of location) - influence of acoustics.
Methods
Our pre- and post-concert surveys measured various aspects of mood, age (<18 years, 18–44 years, 45–64 years, 65 + years), participants’ listening preferences, and perspective on concert aesthetics, such as acoustics and performance quality (Appendixes A and B). Variables that capture expected effects of music performance on the emotions, such as nostalgia, tension, and joy, were summarized into a single score.
We adapted and utilized Mayer and Cavallaro’s Brief Mood Introspection scale, which is based on the Meddis (1972) response scale and was useful in helping us set up a survey scoring system. We did not find any existing quantitative surveys that measured the impact of concert attendance based on past concert attendance or listening history of participants.
Three key mood variables were used from Mayer and Cavallaro’s Brief Mood Introspection scale (2019): “Overall mood last month” represents how pleasant they felt in the previous month on a scale from 1 to 10. “Overall mood” represents how pleasant they felt currently on a scale from 1 to 10. Lastly, “Detailed mood” represents participants who were asked to rate their current mood across 16 variables, such as happiness and sadness. Scores for these subscales ranged from 1 to 7, yielding a total score with a maximum value of 112.
The primary analysis focused on the difference between pre- and post-concert moods, and these were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. While there were missing responses to various survey questions, we conducted an extensive examination of the absence mechanism to determine whether our underlying assumption of the outcome data being missing completely at random (MCAR) was appropriate. If our assumption of MCAR did hold, we could conduct an analysis excluding the missing data without introducing bias. Given the non-normal distribution of the mood scores, mood changes were summarized using median and interquartile range (IQR), and Spearman’s rank correlation was used to assess the relationship between mood changes and continuous variables. The Kruskal–Wallis test was used to assess the median change in mood among categorical variables. Bayesian quantile regression was used to determine the median change in mood, with random effects for the various concerts to test if differences between concerts had an impact on the results.
The AMEND (assessment of music experiences in navigating depression) test studied deeper components of our concerts constructed specifically as “Sound Journeys.” These concerts were designed to assess the effects of communal music concerts relative to participants’ receptivity, inclusive of their past attendance of music concerts, involvement in music activities, self-use of music, and mood changes both before and after attending live concerts designed for their age group. Our team consisted of four music therapists from the Louis Armstrong Center for Music and Medicine’s Sinai hospital system, with several Carnegie staff who agreed to be our partners and who arranged most of the concerts. The performances planned were based on the vulnerable populations we were studying in the AMEND study: children, teens and college students, post-NICU parents, and adults with MCI who were facing depression. Participants attended concerts mostly on weekends.
While these unique concerts were set up to appeal to particular age groups and were targeted to reach those who had been experiencing sadness or depression, we also received participants from the general population of New York City. For the purposes of our study, concerts targeted for children included Falu Shah, ARKAI, Sonia De Los Santos, and Baba Israel and Friends. The performance by Jon Batiste was targeted toward teens and adults, whereas performances by Joshua Roman and Nathalie Joachim were targeted toward older adults. We aimed to study the impact of the listening patterns based on participants’ history inclusive of past concerts, access to musical performances, and their frequency of concert attendances. In our development, we included pre- and post-concert surveys implemented to gain growing knowledge of how well-being concerts would best meet the needs 9of our attendees. All the participants provided informed anonymous written consent on their surveys. The consent was clearly defined as inclusion in a research study that could lead to publication.
Rentfrow and Gosling’s (2003) article entitled The Do Re Mi’s of Everyday Life: The Structure and Personality Correlates of Music Preferences was informative and beneficial to our aim of having a survey that examined individual differences in music preferences. This informed our desire to build upon the examination of such differences, coupled with our aim to “explore the structure of music preferences and its links to personality, self-views, and cognitive ability” and a quest to “lay the foundations on which a broad theory of music preferences could be built.” (Rentfrow and Gosling, 2003, p. 1237).
Integrating music therapy and performance-based staff was important as we developed the concept of “Sound Journeys” with implications that well-being in the attendees would be achieved in different ways based on the concert plans and how they would be instituted for the varying ages of the populations we studied.
Concert Set Up and Survey Collection
Our pre- and post-concert surveys measured various aspects of mood, age (<18 years, 18–44 years, 45–64 years, 65 + years), participants’ listening preferences, and perspective on concert aesthetics, such as acoustics and performance quality (Appendixes A and B). Variables that capture expected effects of music performance on emotions such as nostalgia, tension, and joy were summarized into a single numerical score.
We adapted and utilized Mayer and Cavallaro’s (2019) Brief Mood Introspection scale, based on the Meddis (1972) response scale, which was useful in helping us set up a survey scoring system. We did so after not finding any quantitative surveys that measured the impact of concert attendance based on past concert attendance or the listening history of participants.
The primary analysis focused on the difference between pre- and post-concert moods, and these were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. Given the non-normal distribution of the mood scores, mood changes were summarized using median and interquartile range (IQR), and Spearman’s rank correlation was used to assess the relationship between mood changes and continuous variables. The Kruskal–Wallis test was used to assess the median change in mood among categorical variables. Bayesian quantile regression was used to determine the median change in mood with random effects for the various concerts to test if differences between concerts had an impact on the results.
Results
Overall Baseline Characteristics
A total of 314 participants participated in the study. Nearly all participants (90.0%, n = 272) attended one concert of the concert series (11 attended two, 3 attended four, and 1 attended six concerts in the series); however a small proportion (∼11.5%, n = 36) of participants did not indicate the concert date of attendance on the data collection forms, so it was difficult to identify which concert they attended. Slightly over two-fifths (43.3%) of participants were between the ages of 18–44, and almost half (47.7%) of participants had historically attended live musical performances once a month (Table 1).
Distribution of baseline characteristics.
Baseline characteristics by age group.
Description: In addition to the concert participants attended by age group, these characteristics involve the perspective of the participants prior to being exposed to any particular concert.
Many participants had no listening preference (43.1%), and almost one-third (31.2%) preferred to listen to music alone. When asked about preference in listening location, among those who responded, the majority of participants chose listening in their home as the first preference (85.0%), second preference (53.0%), or third preference (52.0%). Listening at school or work followed as the second preference (40.0%) and third preference (3.02%). Lastly, listening while commuting followed as the third preference (17.0%). Reasons for attending concerts were mostly the result of being invited by a friend or family member (42.9%), with similar proportions attending concerts because they follow the artist (27.4%) or needed something to do (28.4%). Almost two-fifths selected “all of the above” (38.7%) for why they may use music to connect with self or other, but the second most-chosen option was to connect with self (14.3%).
Almost half (47.4%) of the participants indicated that they believe that music performance affects their mood depending on who they are with or the type of music they are listening to. On a 10-point scale, half of the participants considered the convenience of the location of the concert to be important with a score of 9, and at least 75.0% of participants gave a score of 7 out of 10. Similarly, 75.0% of participants gave at least a score of 7 or 8 for venue atmosphere, venue acoustics, music quality, and performance quality, indicating a high level of importance to them.
Baseline Characteristics by Age Group
Baseline characteristics by age group are comprehensively described in Table 1. Briefly, participants younger than 18 had their greatest proportion (30.0%) among those who said they never attended a live performance before, while the other age groups all had their greatest proportion among those who attend a live performance once a week (i.e., 48.7% 18–44; 28.2% 45–64; 15.4% 65+). All participants attended a live performance at least once a month and had no overall preference for how they like to listen to music in terms of with others, by themselves, or alone. See Figure 1.
Baseline characteristics by age group. These are the categorical baseline characteristics by age group. The x-axis is the proportion of individuals within an age group for a particular response. On the y-axis, NA represents those individuals who did not respond to the specific questions.
Change in Mood Metrics and Musical Preference Align with Concerts
In our examination of absence reasons for the three mood outcomes of interest, we had insufficient evidence to suggest statistically significant differences in the distributions of baseline characteristics between those who had complete (i.e., pre- and post-concert perceptions of mood available) and incomplete (i.e., only pre-concert perceptions of mood available) responses. Thus, our underlying assumption of MCAR for the absence mechanism for the mood outcomes was confirmed to be appropriate.
Overall, there was a significant positive change in participants’ moods in relation to concert attendance. The median difference in detailed mood was 10.48 (95% CI: 7.35, 13.36) on a scale ranging from 0–112 (Figure 2). The importance of performance quality and acoustics were positively correlated with detailed mood (r = .15, p-value = .04; r = .16, p-value = .03, respectively). The importance of location convenience was negatively correlated with detailed mood (r = -0.20, p-value < .01). The change from pre- to post-concert survey response in overall pleasant mood was 1.02 (95% CI: 0.47, 1.6) on a scale from 0–10. The concerts featuring Jon Batiste and Baba Israel showed above-average improvements in pleasant mood. Investigating whether there changes in mood were based on age, previous listening preferences, behavior, or expectations did not yield any statistical evidence for significant changes in mood. We did note that these two concerts had performers that were quite interactive and came off the stage to participate on the floor within the audience.
Of the three mood metrics we report, the three measurements pre-concert, post-concert, and the difference are reflected above. The current mood metric is in relation to the y-axis to the left, and the other mood metrics are on a different scale and are in relation to the y-axis on the right.
More than half of the participants (57.9%) reported that the music performed at the concert(s) they attended was not what they typically listen to, but, on a 10-point scale with higher scores indicating stronger connection, most participants strongly connected with the music (Median = 9, IQR = 8–10).
This finding is interesting and emphasizes the fact that other factors aside from musical preferences motivate people to attend concerts. Considering age, half of participants aged 65 and above attended the concert because they followed the artist. The other age groups mostly attended because they were invited by a family or a friend. Attending because it was something to do or to get out of the house was a tie for participants aged 18 and younger (45%). Participants 65 and older were more likely to consider the music performed at the concert to be typical of what they listen to (difference in proportion of yes to no was 8%, ex: 15%/7%), while other age groups were more likely to say no (difference in proportion of yes to no of 2% for <18 years, 2% for 18–44 years., 3% for 45–64 years). However, all age groups had a similar positive connection with the concert music (median = 9, IQR = 8–10). More details on musical preference alignment can be found in Table 3.
Characteristics while attending a concert by age group.
Description: These questions were intended to compare pre- and post-concert exposure.
Performer Surveys
We collected a total of 22 performer surveys (Appendix C), deciding early on that the surveys for performers were best filled out after the performance so they would not feel pressured about being “rated” and bring this into their performances. Most of our performers are professional musicians that perform daily or weekly. Most often play music for themselves. The performers were asked to rank three out of seven reasons for why they primarily perform from 1–3, where 1 is the most and 3 is the least. Of the seven reasons, performers said they primarily performed for artistic creative expression, followed by “to collaborate with others” and to serve the community. When asked in what ways they engage musically, the top three responses were by recording, community music sharing, and teaching.
Performers were asked how they evaluate their performance with seven questions and to rank them from 1 to 7 with 1 being the least important and 7 the most important. Performers responded mostly that audience response was a 4, number of mistakes as 5, and rebooking as 6. Performers’ top three responses to the question about how they feel before a performance included: lively, active, happy. For how they felt during a performance, they typically responded that they felt active, happy, and lively. After the performances, performers indicated that they felt loving, happy, and active. On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 means least pleasant and 10 is most pleasant, we observed a median (IQR) score of 8 (IQR = 7–10) among performers as it relates to feeling pleasant after the performance. Their mood last month was similar, having a median score of 7 (IQR = 6–9). When asked if their mood impacts their performance on the same scale, the majority responded with a 10 (IQR = 8–10). The mood of the performers seems to be an important variable.
Discussion
While the observed changes in attendees’ mood did not seem to be dependent on any one concert, kind of music, listening history, or frequency of attendance experienced, live music did, indeed, in general, have a positive impact on mood. While we tested if differences between concerts had an impact on the results, the effect was too small to be meaningful. The positive correlations between concert performance quality, acoustics, and detailed mood may suggest that the change in mood is associated with performance quality and the acoustics of the room. Yet this correlation was relatively small (r < .20). In contrast, the convenience of the location of the concert was negatively correlated with detailed mood. It may be that the live performance positively impacts one’s mood even though the concert location may not be convenient or to their liking.
In consideration of missing data, data imputation was not considered given the lack of other explanations for missing observations, and responders would most likely be given the same post-concert mood score as those who attended a single concert. Overall, despite the absences observed in the outcome variables, there is a significant positive difference in mood from pre- to post-concert survey responses; however this difference is not statistically explained by other conditions such as their listening history, age, or preferences as they pertain to location, quality of performance, or concert initiatives. This was surprising. More work may be needed to determine effect sizes that are appropriate for determining meaningfully different changes in mood. Through surveying groups of participants in designing concerts based on age and through a variety of unique, assorted cultural genres we discovered useful outcomes related to mood, place, and time.
Reflections
Our research group summarized some of the content from our post-concert meetings that we found useful as we proceeded in developing the concept of “wellbeing” concerts, and most particular in developing “Sound Journeys.” While the initial square concert seating seemed nice, we thought in our concert development that performers could be asked to negotiate better, attending to all sides of the room, if participants were seated in a circle, which would make participants feel more connected to one another. We also wondered if the stage crew could be oriented to be gentler and more inclusive. This could be helped by making the strict “doors closed” cues less stringent for latecomers or people who are slower to get inside. We found that it worked best to keep the house doors open so families who arrived late could enter comfortably and leave for bathroom breaks as needed.
Situating Performers to the Space
We talked about an immersive stage/audience staging and briefed performers about the challenges of audiences on multiple or all sides. This was helpful. We were careful to keep in our performers’ mind what direction each musician should be facing while on the stage, so that no section of the audience would ever have all the entertainers’ backs facing them. We also recognized how important the ushers and welcomers were in participants’ experiences before, during, and after the performances. We found that it affected the performance and absorption of the well-being experience in general.
We liked the introduction and “situating to the performance space” atmosphere that some of the performers created prior to beginning their music and think this influenced how the subsequent performance was an indicator of how the performance was digested. We asked the concert performers to be careful about “leading” the responses of the surveys that related to the performances too obviously—avoiding questions such as “Isn’t it amazing how music helps us feel better?” This point was shared with the performers prior to their performances.
Responses to Attending: Expanding the Community Invitations
As we progressed with our “Sound Journeys,” we moved our systems for RSVPing and collecting surveys to more inclusive systems. We sought to increase the participation by 8-to-13-year-old children. Opening the concerts up to public booking through all channels clearly attracted an increasing number of sign-ups, but it did not provide a guarantee that people would attend or that the RSVPs would include children of the targeted age. With this in mind, the team planned to engage specific community partners, such as settlement houses and schools, and held half of the room for RSVPs through partners. The remainder would still be offered to the public, but we sought to be increasingly insistent in the text about the child focus and age range. We also added a QR code poster to the survey collection.
We eventually spoke with the host and artists about finding a child-friendly approach to the well-being elements and the music itself. Arkai included popular songs played on stringed instruments as well as “ambient” musical experiences on electric violin and cello as part of her concert content. The children loved this. Calmness and managing the mindfulness/meditative moments in a more focused way became a communal goal for the concerts, and we shared this with the performers.
We also thought the “closure” thematic talk was a nice inclusion but perhaps should not include subject topics about “grading the efficacy” of the playing and should rather focus on the experience and how attendees might take the experience with them as a transition or transfer experience for continuity.
Conclusion
Our teams have expanded our knowledge about concerts as we seek to understand and further plan essential elements influencing the conditions that we set up for the music’s capacity to fulfill social prescribing, especially in our collaborations that took place pre- and post-concert between music therapists and music performing artists. Through surveying groups of participants and designing concerts based on age inclusive of a variety of unique, assorted cultural genres, we discovered interesting outcomes.
We found that how we recruited, introduced, and oriented both concert attendees and performers affected the experience in its entirety. The conditions surrounding the concerts did not have as large an impact as we thought they would. It was the musical content itself and the acoustics and content that brought about the most significant change in the listeners’ mood.
Within the development of Wellness Concerts, we believe there are increasing benefits to be had, and this study informed us of potential future directions. Future studies might further investigate how performers decide on the content of their music-both before and during their performance.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the National Endowment for the Arts and Sarah Johnson at Carnegie Hall who was instrumental in helping us set up the concerts.
The survey study questions were set up by the research team at Mount Sinai, and the Wellness Concerts were organized by our partners at Carnegie Weill Institute. While the pre- and post-concert surveys were developed by the team, and the concerts by the performers, the musical compositions per se were not a part of our study, although the music the performers played had an influential role in the audience responses.
Action Editor
Katie Rose Sanfilippo, City St George's University of London, School of Health and Medical Sciences, Department of Population Health and Policy.
Peer Review
Two anonymous reviewers.
Ethical Approval
The ethics committee of Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Health System approved this study (Study 22-10609).
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data Availability Statement
Our data is reported within the paper but if readers would like to access our surveys, they can be requested by contacting first author.
Appendix A and B,C: Pre- and Post-concert Surveys