MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W154012441

Secondary prevention of depression in primary care

2007· article· en· W154012441 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sara González González, Concepción Fernández Rodríguez, Jorge Pérez Rodríguez, Isaac Amigo Vázquez

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology in Spain · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychopathologyDepression (economics)PsychiatryInterpersonal psychotherapyMental healthPsychologyMajor depressive disorderCommitPrimary careMedicineClinical psychologyPsychotherapistCognitionRandomized controlled trialFamily medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

cause for concern in Western society. The commonest psychopathological symptoms are depressive ones. Likewise, depressive disorders are the third most common psychopathology, with a life prevalence of between 2% and 25%, both in the United States and in Spain (Ayuso-Mateos et al., 2001; Kaplan & Sadock, 1999). These problems produce an enormous strain on primary care centres and mental health centres in Spain. Between 15 and 40% of primary care centre patients present psychological disorders, and 25% of them have depression (Bernardo, 2000). Depressive disorders commonly involve relapses, chronification and serious repercussions, including suicide. Between 40 and 85% of people with major depression experience at least one relapse in their lives. Of those who commit suicide, between 50% and 70% have a medical history that includes some depressive disorder (Coon & Thompson, 2003; Gonzalez, Ramos, Caballero & Wagner, 2003; Emslie, Mayes, Laptook & Batt, 2003; Merrill, Tolbert & Wade, 2003). Although there are a wide range of theories for explaining depression, it is assumed here that this psychopathology derives largely from people’s lack of strategies (or the inadequacy of those strategies) for coping with life problems. The proliferation of psychotherapeutic approaches for treating depression is overwhelming, but not all of them are sufficiently supported by scientific studies. After an exhaustive review it can be concluded that the psychotherapies that have best proven their efficacy for depression are behaviour therapy, cognitive therapy and interpersonal therapy, and that the group format is as efficacious or more so than the individual one, but more effective and efficient. With regard to social support groups it cannot be concluded whether they equal or inferior to previous psychotherapies (Jacobson & Hollon, 1996; Labrador, Echeburua & Becona, 2000; Perez & Garcia, 2003; Shapiro, Barkham, Rees, Hardy, Reynolds & Startup, 1994; Task Force on Promotion and Dissemination of Psychological Procedures, 1995). On the other hand, the specific therapeutic elements of the treatments is an issue that has not been definitively resolved insofar as the variables they address do not SECONDARY PREVENTION OF DEPRESSION IN PRIMARY CARE

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.385 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology in Spain→Same topicMental Health Treatment and Access→French-language works237,207→