Cognitive behaviour therapy and medication in the treatment of obsessive–compulsive disorder
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) with CBT plus medication; medication alone; and placebo in the treatment of adult obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). METHOD: Forty-eight participants (43 completers) were recruited into two protocols. In the first protocol, 21 people with OCD were randomly allocated to either a standard medication (fluvoxamine) or standard placebo condition for a 5-month period. Both these groups subsequently received CBT for a further 5 months. In the second protocol, 22 people with OCD received CBT, one group was already stabilized on an antidepressant of choice; the second group was drug naïve. RESULTS: All active treatments, but not the placebo, showed clinical improvement. There was no difference in treatment response to CBT regardless of whether participants had previously received medication or placebo. CONCLUSION: CBT has a more specific antiobsessional effect than medication but CBT plus medication shows greatest overall clinical improvement in mood.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it