MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978364785 · doi:10.1586/14737167.3.5.535

The cost-effectiveness of short-term dynamic psychotherapy

2003· article· en· W1978364785 on OpenAlexaff
Allan Abbass

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychotherapistTerm (time)Mental healthMedicinePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Short-term dynamic psychotherapy is a group of well-researched brief treatments with over 50 published controlled trials testing its effectiveness against a range of treatment and nontreatment controls. Studied samples are often high users of medical services, hospital services, mental health services and disability insurance. If short-term dynamic psychotherapy is effective, it should translate into demonstrable reductions in medical and social system costs. This review examines whether or not short-term dynamic psychotherapy is a cost-effective treatment.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.639
Teacher spread0.511 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations38
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes ResearchSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207