MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045637382 · doi:10.1177/1066480703261980

Home-Based Family Therapy: A Misunderstanding of the Role and a New Challenge for Therapists

2004· article· en· W2045637382 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

VenueThe Family Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEducational Foundation of America
KeywordsFamily therapyPsychotherapistPsychologyStrengths and weaknessesClinical PracticeTreatment modalityMedicineNursingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The family therapy field has hesitantly incorporated the home-based family therapy modality. Today, there are a number of agencies offering home-based family therapy in response to the increasing need to reach out to multifaceted problem families and to ensure the continuity and effectiveness of treatments. Nonetheless, there is little research and literature supporting this approach, and no clear guidelines for home-based therapy practice have been developed to date. Many academic institutes fail to train therapists in this area, despite the fact that it is a growing market trend. This article examines the literature describing home-based therapy, provides an analysis of its weaknesses and strengths, and formulates some considerations for therapists interested in its practice.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.239 · 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