Danger Ideation Reduction Therapy for Obsessive–Compulsive Checking: Preliminary Findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Danger Ideation Reduction Therapy (DIRT) is a cognitive treatment package developed in the mid-1990s to treat obsessive-compulsive (OC) washing. DIRT is solely directed at decreasing threat expectancies and does not involve direct or indirect exposure. The effectiveness of the DIRT package for OC washers has been examined, and to date a number of publications, including two randomised controlled trials, support its efficacy. Recently, the DIRT package was modified to treat people with the OC checking subtype. In the current study, three adult OC checkers received DIRT in 12 to 14 individual 1-hr sessions conducted by a clinical psychologist. At posttreatment, substantial and clinically significant reductions in scores on a range of standardized outcome measures of obsessive-compulsive disorder symptom severity were apparent for all three participants. Crucially, these improvements were maintained at 4-month follow-up. Although further research is clearly warranted, these preliminary findings suggest that DIRT for checkers may prove as effective as DIRT for OC washers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".