MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096442541 · doi:10.1375/anft.28.2.61

Parent and Child Therapy (PACT) In Action: An Attachment‐Based Intervention for a Six‐Year‐Old With a Dual Diagnosis

2007· article· en· W2096442541 on OpenAlexaff
Jackie Amos, Simon Beal, Gareth Furber

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPactIntervention (counseling)DistressPsychologyPsychotherapistChild psychotherapyNeglectChild abuseFamily therapyDyadChild neglectInterpersonal communicationClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This case study explores Parent and Child Therapy (PACT), an attachment‐based intervention for mothers and children experiencing intractable relationship distress originally developed by Heather Chambers (a Child Psychotherapist and Family Therapist working in New Zealand). We describe the use of PACT with a mother—child dyad presenting a history of severe abuse and neglect. The child had been diagnosed with Conduct Disorder and co‐morbid Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. We consider the themes arising in the therapy, the emotional process experienced by the mother and child, the initial outcome and 10‐month follow up. The case study indicates that PACT can be learned and used by practitioners outside of the team that conceptualised and developed it. The case highlights the links between externalising difficulties and attachment disorganisation and points to PACT as a promising treatment for the chronic sequelae of early interpersonal childhood trauma. The need for research and possible directions of this research 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
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 score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations18
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Family TherapySame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207