Using cognitive behaviour therapy with South Asian Muslims: Findings from the culturally sensitive CBT project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been suggested that cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) needs adaptation for it to be effective for patients from collectivistic cultures, as currently CBT is underpinned by individualistic values. In prior studies we have demonstrated that CBT could be adapted for Pakistani patients in Southampton, UK, and for local populations in Pakistan. Findings from these studies suggest that CBT can be adapted for patients from collectivistic cultures using a series of steps. In this paper we focus on these steps, and the process of adapting CBT for specific groups. The adaptation process should focus on three major areas of therapy, rather than simple translation of therapy manuals. These include (1) awareness of relevant cultural issues and preparation for therapy, (2) assessment and engagement, and (3) adjustments in therapy. We also discuss the best practice guidelines that evolved from this work to help therapists working with this population. We reiterate that CBT can be adapted effectively for patients from traditional cultures. This is, however, an emerging area in psychotherapy, and further work is required to refine the methodology and to test adapted CBT.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".