Delivering Cognitive-Behavior Therapy for Panic Disorder with Agoraphobia in Videoconference
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
Delivering psychotherapy by videoconference could significantly increase the accessibility of empirically validated treatments. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT) for panic disorder with agoraphobia (PDA) when the therapy is delivered either face-to-face or by videoconference. A sample of 21 participants was treated either face-to-face or by videoconference. Results showed that CBT delivered by videoconference was as effective as CBT delivered face-to-face. There was a statistically significant reduction in all measures, and the number of panic-free participants among those receiving CBT by videoconference was 81% at post-treatment and 91% at the 6-month follow-up. None of the comparisons with face-to-face psychotherapy suggested that CBT delivered by videoconference was less effective. These results were confirmed by analyses of effect size. The participants reported the development of an excellent therapeutic alliance in videoconference as early as the first therapy session. The importance of these results for treatment accessibility is discussed. Hypotheses are proposed to explain the rapid creation of strong therapeutic alliances in videoconferencing.
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 | 0.001 | 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