MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025592306 · doi:10.1177/1534650103258973

Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment of Trichotillomania, Targeting Perfectionism

2004· article· en· W2025592306 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Case Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut universitaire en santé mentale de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionCognitive behavioral therapyPerfectionism (psychology)Situational ethicsClinical psychologyIntervention (counseling)HabitCognitive restructuringCognitive stylePsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trichotillomania or hair pulling has been considered mainly as a tensionreducing habit. However, other cognitive, emotional, and situational factors have been identified as important in the development andmaintenance of this disorder. The present case study applied habit reversal techniques, with the addition of a cognitive modification of perfectionist beliefs and style of action, in the treatment of a 23-year-old woman. During an 18-week period, her hair-pulling behavior decreased from a mean of 24 hairs pulled each day to 1 hair pulled overall in a week. A 1.5-year follow-up showed that the client suffered a small relapse during a period of 2 weeks. A self-imposed return to cognitive and behavioral techniques eliminated further pulling. This single case report raises the possibility that perfectionismmay be an important target for cognitive-behavioral treatment intervention in habit disorders such as trichotillomania.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.347 · 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