Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Panic Disorder with Agoraphobia in Videoconference: Preliminary Results
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies have shown the feasibility of psychiatric consultation in telehealth, and some have addressed the effectiveness of telepsychotherapy. However, outcome studies on telepsychiatry essentially amount to a few case studies, none of which have used an empirically validated psychosocial treatment to treat a specific mental disorder. This article presents the preliminary results of an outcome study on the effectiveness of telepsychotherapy for panic disorder with agoraphobia. Participants received 12 sessions of cognitive-behavior therapy, which is an empirically validated treatment for panic disorder with agoraphobia. The treatment was delivered via videoconference by trained therapists according to a standardized treatment manual. The remote site was located at 130 km north of the local site and both were linked by six ISDN lines. Telepsychotherapy demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvements on measures of target symptoms (frequency, of panic attacks, panic apprehension, severity of panic disorder, perceived self-efficacy) and measures of global functioning (trait anxiety, general improvement). Of interest was the fact that a very good therapeutic alliance was built after only the first telepsychotherapy session. Factors that may reduce the effectiveness of telepsychotherapy are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it