MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018720755 · doi:10.1002/anzf.1009

DSM‐5 and Evidence‐Based Family Therapy?

2013· article· en· W2018720755 on OpenAlexafffund
Tom Strong, Robbie Busch

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAustralian Psychological SocietyUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsExpeditingFamily therapyPsychotherapistPsychologyEvidence-based practiceMedicinePsychiatryAlternative medicineManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, (DSM‐5) extends a profession and practice‐defining direction for family therapy. Warranting and expediting this medicalised direction has been a scientific and administrative coupling of diagnosed symptomatic conditions with evidence‐based treatments for addressing those conditions. For systemically or poststructurally oriented family therapists tensions can follow from this direction which we elaborate upon in this article. Specifically, we examine the premises behind this medicalised direction for family therapy, juxtaposing these premises with systemic and post‐structural premises of practice. We relate these juxtapositions to tensions family therapists may need to reconcile in their work with families. We close with an overview of this special issue's contributions that pertain to the DSM‐5 and family therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.121
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations22
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Family TherapySame topicCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207