Pilot Evaluation of a Group Therapy Program for Children Bereaved by Suicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thousands of children are bereaved each year by suicide, yet there exists very little literature specifically on the psychological care, programs, and interventions available to help them. AIMS: (1) To build and validate theoretical models for the Group Therapy Program for Children Bereaved by Suicide (PCBS); (2) to test these models in a preliminary evaluation. METHODS: In the first part, we built theoretical models, which were then validated by scientists and clinicians. In the second part, the sessions of the PCBS were observed and rated. The participating children were tested pre- and postprogram. RESULTS: Positive changes were observed in the participating children in terms of basic safety, realistic understanding and useful knowledge, inappropriate behaviors, physical and psychological symptoms, child-parent and child-child communication, capacity for social and affective reinvestment, actualization of new models of self and the world, self-esteem, awareness and use of tools, cognitive, verbal, written and drawing abilities, cognitive dissonance, ambivalence, antagonism, and isolation. CONCLUSIONS: The changes reported in the bereaved children show that the PCBS has some efficacy.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".