MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047852098 · doi:10.1007/s10960-004-5795-7

Are avoidance and numbing distinct PTSD symptom clusters?

2004· review· en· W2047852098 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

VenueJournal of Traumatic Stress · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyClinical psychologyPosttraumatic stress

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the conceptual basis and empirical evidence for considering avoidance and numbing as distinct posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom clusters. The majority of data from factor analytic studies supports the position that avoidance and numbing are distinct symptom clusters. As well, the available data suggest that (a) different treatment modalities have differential effects on reducing avoidance but not numbing, (b) patients with more severe pretreatment numbing have poorer treatment outcomes, (c) avoidance and numbing have different patterns of correlation with depression, and (d) they have different correlations with physiological indices of attention. We conclude that avoidance and numbing are distinct PTSD symptom clusters. This distinction has implications for revising current diagnostic criteria. The recognition of this distinction may lead to advances in understanding and treating PTSD.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.285 · 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