MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093943093 · doi:10.1177/1534650103256277

Motivational Enhancement Therapy in Two Cases of Anxiety Disorder

2003· article· en· W2093943093 on OpenAlexaff
Henny A. Westra, Elizabeth Phoenix

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Case Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionOperationalizationPsychologyAnxietyClinical psychologyCognitive behavioral therapySocial anxietyPsychotherapistExposure therapyCognitive therapyCognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has been consistently supported as highly efficacious in the management of various anxiety disorders, a significant number of individuals fail to respond to treatment. In this article, the authors present an attempt to operationalize and implement alternative interventions in two cases of CBT non-responsiveness for anxiety management. Both cases were identified as CBT nonresponsive through repeated psychometric assessment of symptoms, and the focus of therapy was shifted to motivational enhancement techniques. These alternative interventions were conceptualized using the Stages of Change Model, which advocates stage-matched interventions based on individual differences in readiness for change. In the first case of generalized anxiety disorder, motivational enhancement interventions were associated with marked improvement in anxiety symptomatology, whereas the second case of social phobia failed to respond to these interventions. Discussion is focused on possible mediators of differential treatment response to motivational interventions with a view to proposing future application and evaluations of these novel techniques.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations16
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Case StudiesSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207