Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Depression after Psychosis: autobiographical memory specificity and rumination as candidate mechanisms of change: \n and Clinical research portfolio
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Understanding how interventions work is a key step in the development and evaluation of complex interventions. Based on previous research, autobiographical memory specificity and rumination are candidate mechanisms of change. Our aim was to explore mechanisms of therapeutic change in the context of a pilot trial of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) for people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia and major depression. \nMethod: The ACT for Depression After Psychosis Trial (ADAPT; Gumley et al., 2017) provided repeated measures data that allowed exploration of the change process in ACT for depression after psychosis. Participants who met criteria for schizophrenia and major depression were randomly allocated to standard care or standard care plus up to 5-months of individual ACT for depression after psychosis (ACTdp). Primary outcomes administered on entry to the study (pre-randomisation), at 5-months (posttreatment), and at 10-months (follow up) included the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS), the Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills (KIMS), and the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ). Candidate mechanisms of change were assessed using Ruminative Response Scale (RRS) and the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT). \nResults: Significant correlations between change scores were found for BDI and proposed mechanisms of change at 5-months (Rumination: r = 0.60, p< .05; Overgeneral memory responses: r = 0.67, p < .05; memory recall latency: r = -0.84, p< .01) and 10-months (Rumination: r = 0.80, p < .01; Overgeneral memory responses: r = 0.61, p < .01). Changes in CDSS depression and rumination scores were significantly correlated at 10-months (Rumination: r = 0.76, p < .01). In order to examine hypotheses that aspects of autobiographical memory specificity would vary by treatment group, cue word valence, and time of assessment, three-way mixed ANOVAs were performed for percentage of overgeneral memories recalled, and emotional tone of events recalled. Significantly more overgeneral responses were recalled for negative cue words (F (1, 22) = 17.817, p < .001, partial eta squared = .447). Additionally, significantly more negative feeling was evoked for memories recalled in response to negative cue words (F (1, 17) = 83.232, p < .001, partial eta squared = .839). A threeway interaction was found for cue word x time point x treatment group’s effect on feeling evoked by memories recalled (F (2, 15) = 6.251, p < .013, partial eta squared = .455). Post-hoc analysis found the negative feeling evoked by memories recalled in response to negative cue words was significantly reduced in the ACT group posttreatment. For the ACT group, the difference between mean feeling evoked to negative cue words at baseline and 5-months was 2.72, (95% CI [-5.115, -0.318], p < .013). \nApplication: This study provides insight into the change mechanisms through which interventions like ACTdp may produce beneficial effects. Preliminary findings suggest ACT may facilitate positive change for those experiencing depression after psychosis by reducing cognitive avoidance and enhancing ability to tolerate recollection and discussion of emotionally challenging events.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».