A comparison of trauma-focused and present-focused group therapy for survivors of childhood sexual abuse: A randomized controlled trial.
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
This randomized controlled trial compared trauma-focused group psychotherapy (TFGT) with presentfocused group psychotherapy (PFGT) and a waitlist condition for 166 survivors of childhood sexual abuse who were at risk for HIV infection. Primary outcomes included risk for HIV infection (based on sexual revictimization, drug and alcohol use, and risky sex) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. It was hypothesized that TFGT would be superior to the PFGT and waitlist conditions and that receiving either treatment (combining both TFGT and PFGT) would be superior to no treatment (waitlist condition). Intention-to-treat analyses for HIV risk found that all conditions reduced risk; however, there was no effect for condition on HIV risk. Intention-to-treat analyses for PTSD symptoms found a reduction for all conditions. There was no advantage for either TFGT or PFGT in reducing PTSD symptoms; however, there was an effect for treatment compared with the waitlist condition. On secondary outcomes, there was a greater reduction in anger for TFGT compared with PFGT, and when comparing treatment with the waitlist condition, there was a greater reduction in hyperarousal, reexperiencing, anger, and impaired self-reference for the treatment condition. Adequate dose analyses generally confirmed the intention-to-treat findings and additionally found that treatment led to reductions in depression, dissociation, and sexual concerns.
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 | 0.019 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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