MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1833157081 · doi:10.1177/2333393615606092

Self-Management Strategies in Recovery From Mood and Anxiety Disorders

2015· article· en· W1833157081 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin Villaggi, Hélène Provencher, Simon Coulombe, Sophie Meunier, Stéphanie Radziszewski, Catherine Hudon, Pasquale Roberge, Martin D. Provencher, Janie Houle

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Qualitative Nursing Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité LavalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersMental Health Commission
KeywordsAnxietyMoodPsychologyBipolar disorderMood disordersClinical psychologySelf-managementMental healthDiversity (politics)PsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mood and anxiety disorders are the most prevalent mental disorders. People with such disorders implement self-management strategies to reduce or prevent their symptoms and to optimize their health and well-being. Even though self-management strategies are known to be essential to recovery, few researchers have examined them. The aim of this study is to explore strategies used by people recovering from depressive, anxiety, and bipolar disorders by asking 50 of them to describe their own strategies. Strategies were classified according to dimensions of recovery: social, existential, functional, physical, and clinical. Within these themes, 60 distinct strategies were found to be used synergistically to promote personal recovery as well as symptom reduction. Findings highlight the diversity of strategies used by people, whether they have depressive, anxiety, or bipolar disorders. This study underscores the importance of supporting self-management in a way that respects individual experience.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.712

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.407 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations61
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Qualitative Nursing ResearchSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207