Review of Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Neuroimaging Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The clinical efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy (PDT) has undergone extensive study and review. Recently, researchers have studied the effects of this treatment on brain metabolic or synaptic activity, but the collective findings have never been reviewed. The objective of this review was to describe the findings of all neuroimaging studies of any form of PDT treatment. An extensive literature search through databases along with surveying of research groups were undertaken to acquire all available published studies. Eleven series were included in the final sample, consisting of 2 randomized controlled trials, 5 controlled trials and 4 case series, altogether involving 210 people: 94 healthy controls and 116 people with mood disorders, panic disorder, somatoform disorders and borderline personality disorder. A variety of neuroimaging techniques were used to examine regional metabolic activity and synaptic neurotransmission before and after treatment. The common finding was normalization of synaptic or metabolic activity in limbic, midbrain and prefrontal regions, occurring in association with improved clinical outcomes. PDT has demonstrable effects on brain function in diverse clinical populations as evidenced by a modest group of mixed neuroimaging studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".