MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067801823 · doi:10.1037/a0015137

Attachment and treatment response among adults in inpatient treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder.

2009· article· en· W2067801823 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert T. Muller, Susan E. Rosenkranz

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychotherapy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsycINFOPosttraumatic stressPsychologyClinical psychologyIntervention (counseling)AnxietyAcute Stress DisorderPsychiatryMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the authors investigated changes in attachment orientation after treatment in an inpatient program for adults with posttraumatic stress disorder. The authors also examined the association between these changes and symptom reduction. Results indicated that secure attachment increased significantly over treatment in comparison to a wait list group, and this change was maintained over the 6 months after discharge. Positive changes were also noted in the underlying attachment dimensions of anxiety and avoidance. Furthermore, positive changes in attachment were found to be associated with symptom reduction during treatment and maintenance of these reductions after discharge. These results have potential implications for the goals of psychotherapeutic intervention in general and for the utility of specialized inpatient trauma treatment specifically. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.370 · 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

Citations52
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychotherapySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207