Response of patients with panic disorder and symptoms of hypomania to cognitive behavior therapy for panic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this cohort study was to determine in patients with Panic Disorder (PD): (1). the prevalence of subsyndromal symptoms of hypomania, and (2). whether subsyndromal hypomania symptoms affect the outcome of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) for panic. METHODS: Using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule, and DSM-III-R criteria we identified 18 individuals with a history of symptoms of hypomania among 56 patients with PD. Patients were treated in an open CBT group program. They were assessed before treatment and 6 and 12 months later. We used the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), the Pearlin-Schooler Mastery Scale (PMS), and the Social Adjustment Scale (SAS) at all assessments. RESULTS: The total group significantly improved on all measures. The Clinically Significant Change was 71.4% and the Reliable Change Index 48.2%. Between 6 and 12 months, there was a trend for the hypomania symptom subgroup (PH) to continue to improve on the BSI Depression Scale, the Perceived Stress Scale, the Pearlin-Schooler Mastery Scale, and the Social Adjustment Scale but to lose gains on the BSI Phobic Anxiety and Somatization subscales compared with the group without symptoms of hypomania (PNH). CONCLUSIONS: Thirty-two percent of patients with PD had symptoms of hypomania. With CBT for panic, patients with PD and symptoms of hypomania improve as much as those without hypomania symptoms. The presence or absence of symptoms of hypomania might help explain the inconsistent effects of depression and personality disorders on the treatment of PD.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".