Comorbidité du TPA : L’impact de différents niveaux d’anxiété sociale sur l’efficacité d’un traitement cognitivo-comportemental du trouble panique avec agoraphobie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims at evaluating in individuals suffering from panic-agoraphobia disorder without social phobia the presence or not of various levels of social anxiety. The study also evaluates the impact of this symptomatic comorbidity on the efficiency of two modes of cognitive behaviorial treatment, namely an auto-directed treatment and a treatment directed by the therapist. The study attempts to determine if the application of a cognitive behavioral treatment program positively or negatively influences the various levels of anxiety. On the other hand, the study evaluates if levels of social anxiety influences the efficiency of the cognitive behavioral treatment in regards to agoraphobic symptomatology. The sample includes 51 people (26 in a therapist-directed treatment and 25 in a auto-directed treatment) suffering from DSM-IV panic disorder with agoraphobia. The authors observed a relatively equivalent number of individuals with a panic-agoraphobia disorder presenting social anxiety at a weak, moderate and high level for the two groups in treatment. Moreover, the authors noted a significant improvement not only of the symptoms of agoraphobia-panic disorder, but also of social anxiety symptoms. There are less participants presenting high or moderate levels of social anxiety after treatment. The two modes of treatment are equivalent in regards to their efficiency. Finally, results only partially indicate that high and moderate levels of social anxiety possibly have a negative influence on the efficiency of treatment as measured by certain components of the disorder. Consequences related to this symptomatic comorbidity as well as possible explanations of various impacts of the efficiency of the treatment 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".