MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969863355 · doi:10.1177/1534650110373387

Implementation and Outcome of Combining Interoceptive Exposure With Trauma-Related Exposure Therapy in a Patient With Combat-Related Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

2010· article· en· W1969863355 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Case Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychopathologyExposure therapyPosttraumatic stressAnxietyClinical psychologyAnxiety sensitivityAnxiety disorderPsychologyAcute Stress DisorderPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Theoretical considerations and several case studies suggest that trauma-related exposure therapy (TRE), which is one of the leading treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), may be augmented by adding interoceptive exposure (IE) therapy. The patient is a retired veteran with chronic PTSD as the primary (most severe) disorder and comorbid major depressive disorder. Treatment consisted of four sessions of IE followed by eight sessions of TRE. Structured interviews and self-report measures of psychopathology are administered pretreatment, midtreatment (after completing IE and before commencing TRE), posttreatment, and at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. IE is associated with decreases in PTSD symptoms and anxiety sensitivity. At posttreatment, there are further reductions in PTSD symptoms and several associated symptoms. There are also further gradual improvements over the follow-up assessments. Implications of these findings are discussed, with an emphasis on identifying potential benefits and limitations of using IE+TRE for combat-related 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.359 · 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