MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053121605 · doi:10.1177/1534650102001001007

Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Suicidal Adolescent Inpatients

2002· article· en· W2053121605 on OpenAlexaff
Laurence Y. Katz, Brian J. Cox

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Case Studies · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialectical behavior therapyBorderline personality disorderBiosocial theoryPsychologyPsychotherapistClinical psychologyParasuicideAcceptance and commitment therapyPersonalityPsychiatryPoison controlIntervention (counseling)Suicide attemptSuicide preventionMedicineSocial psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) is an empirically supported treatment for chronically parasuicidal adult women with borderline personality disorder. It has recently been modified for use with other psychiatric disorders and populations. In this article, the authors briefly review the theoretical and research basis for the use of DBT with parasuicidal adolescent inpatients, and a case study is presented. The case study includes a DBT case formulation, and its application to the inpatient management of a chronically parasuicidal adolescent is described. This adolescent had significant difficulties engaging in treatment and required use of DBT commitment strategies, which are reviewed. The authors also describe (a) the use of a stage theory of treatment, (b) the application of Linehan's biosocial theory, (c) use of behavioral analysis of parasuicidal behavior, and (d) dialectical treatment of this patient. Finally, 1-year follow-up data on this patient are presented.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.373
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.151 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Case StudiesSame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207