Treating co-occurring Axis I disorders in recurrently suicidal women with borderline personality disorder: A 2-year randomized trial of dialectical behavior therapy versus community treatment by experts.
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
This study evaluated whether dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) was more efficacious than treatment by nonbehavioral psychotherapy experts in reducing co-occurring Axis I disorders among suicidal individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD). Women with BPD and recent and repeated suicidal and/or self-injurious behavior (n = 101) were randomly assigned to 1 year of DBT or community treatment by experts (CTBE), plus 1 year of follow-up assessment. For substance dependence disorders (SDD), DBT patients were more likely to achieve full remission, spent more time in partial remission, spent less time meeting full criteria, and reported more drug- and alcohol-abstinent days than did CTBE patients. These findings suggest that improvements in co-occurring SDD among suicidal BPD patients are specific to DBT and cannot be attributed to general factors associated with nonbehavioral expert psychotherapy. Further, group differences in SDD remission were not explained by either psychotropic medication usage or changes in BPD criterion behaviors. DBT and CTBE did not significantly differ in the reduction of anxiety disorders, eating disorders, or major depressive disorder.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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