El tratamiento cognitivo comportamental del TAG: modelo conceptual y casos clínicos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"El objetivo de este artículo es presentar un modelo conceptual, como así también un plan de tratamiento cognitivo-comportamental del Trastorno de Ansiedad Generalizada (TAG). En un primer tiempo, exponemos nuestro modelo del TAG, que comprende cuatro procesos cognitivos implicados en el desarrollo y exacerbación de los síntomas de este trastorno, como ser: la intolerancia a la incertidumbre, la tendencia a sobrevolarar la utilidad de preocuparse, la orientación ineficaz frente a los problemas, y la evitación cognitiva. Luego presentamos nuestro protocolo de tratamiento del TAG, que ha sido desarrollado a partir de este modelo conceptual. Comprende 6 módulos conceptuales: psicoeducación y entrenamiento en la toma de conciencia de las preocupaciones; reconocimiento de la incertidumbre y exposición comportamental; reevaluación de la utilidad de preocuparse; entrenamiento en la resolución de problemas; exposición imaginaria y prevención de las recaídas. Con el fin de ilustrar mejor los componentes del trastorno se presenta el caso de un paciente que padece de TAG."
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".