MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088132469 · doi:10.1037/0033-3204.44.4.423

Change in attachment anxiety is associated with improved depression among women with binge eating disorder.

2007· article· en· W2088132469 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

VenuePsychotherapy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPsycINFOInterpersonal psychotherapyAnxietyClinical psychologyDepression (economics)PsychodynamicsBinge eatingCognitive behavioral therapyPsychodynamic psychotherapyAttachment theoryPsychotherapistPsychiatryEating disordersMEDLINEMedicineRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study examined if the relationship between change in attachment insecurity and target symptom outcomes was moderated by treatment type. Women (N = 66) with binge eating disorder (BED) were randomly assigned to two treatment types: group cognitive-behavioral therapy (GCBT) or group psychodynamic-interpersonal psychotherapy (GPIP). Results indicated significant positive pre- to posttreatment changes in all attachment insecurity scales, but no difference between GCBT and GPIP on these changes. Change in attachment anxiety was related to improved depression for women completing GPIP, but not for women completing GCBT. This indicated a moderating effect of treatment type in explaining the relationship between change in attachment anxiety and improved depression. Changes in attachment anxiety may be important for symptom outcomes related to psychodynamic-interpersonal therapies. (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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.339 · 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