A Yoga Intervention Program for Patients Suffering from Symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Qualitative Descriptive Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To understand how individuals with symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) perceive a trauma-sensitive Kundalini yoga (KY) program. METHODS: Digitally recorded telephone interviews 30-60 minutes in duration were conducted with 40 individuals with PTSD participating in an 8-week KY treatment program. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis techniques. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis identifies three major themes: self-observed changes, new awareness, and the yoga program itself. Findings suggest that participants noted changes in areas of health and well-being, lifestyle, psychosocial integration, and perceptions of self in relation to the world. Presented are practical suggestions for trauma-related programming. CONCLUSION: There is a need to consider alternative and potentially empowering approaches to trauma treatment. Yoga-related self-care or self-management strategies are widely accessible, are empowering, and may address the mind-body elements of PTSD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".