MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971483362 · doi:10.1136/ebmh.5.3.78

A group cognitive therapy programme reduced depressive episodes in at risk adolescents at 12 months of follow up

2002· letter· en· W1971483362 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Sanford

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Mental Health · 2002
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDepression (economics)Web of sciencePediatricsRandomized controlled trialInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clarke GN, Hornbrook M, Lynch F, et al. A randomized trial of a group cognitive intervention for preventing depression in adolescent offspring of depressed parents. Arch Gen Psychiatry2001 Dec; 58 : 1127 –34 [OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] QUESTION: In adolescents with depressive symptoms and who have depressed parents, does a group cognitive intervention prevent or delay the onset of the subsequent development of a full depressive episode? Randomised {allocation concealed*}††, blinded {data collectors, data analysts, and study investigators}†,*, controlled trial with 24 months of follow up (median 14 months of follow up). Health maintenance organization (HMO) in Portland, Oregon, USA. 94 adolescents (mean age 15 y, 60% girls) with both subsyndromal depression and a parent with either a current episode of major depression or dysthymia, or an episode in the previous 12 months. 83% were followed for up to 24 months. 45 adolescents were allocated to usual HMO care plus a … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DArchives%2Bof%2BGeneral%2BPsychiatry%26rft.stitle%253DArch%2BGen%2BPsychiatry%26rft.aulast%253DClarke%26rft.auinit1%253DG.%2BN.%26rft.volume%253D58%26rft.issue%253D12%26rft.spage%253D1127%26rft.epage%253D1134%26rft.atitle%253DA%2BRandomized%2BTrial%2Bof%2Ba%2BGroup%2BCognitive%2BIntervention%2Bfor%2BPreventing%2BDepression%2Bin%2BAdolescent%2BOffspring%2Bof%2BDepressed%2BParents%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1001%252Farchpsyc.58.12.1127%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F11735841%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/archpsyc.58.12.1127&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=11735841&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmental%2F5%2F3%2F78.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000172586000004&link_type=ISI

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)0.000
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based Mental HealthSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207