Marital Interactions as Predictors of Symptoms Severity in Panic Disorder with Agoraphobia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several studies showed associations among marital variables and panic disorder with agoraphobia (PDA)symptomatology. However, very few explored this issue using behavioural coding of couples’ interactions. We conducted this study to investigate whether observed marital interaction patterns would predict PDA severity.Cross-sectional, pre-treatment multi-center study of 65 married couples in which one spouse was diagnosed withpanic disorder with agoraphobia (PDA).All participants completed seven self-reported PDA symptoms measures commonly used in PDA research andtwo self-reported marital measures. Couples were observed during a 15-minute video-taped problem-solving task.The spouses’ marital interactions were coded by two independent coders using two validated observationalcoding systems.After controlling for socio-economical variables, the presence of negative marital interaction patterns, namelycriticism and dominance behaviour, predicted higher symptom severity, whereas the presence of positiveinteraction patterns, namely support and validation behaviours, predicted lower symptom severity . Emotionalover-involvement of the non-PDA partner, a manifestation of expressed emotions, failed to predict PDA severity.Discord in the couple could exacerbate the PDA and maintain it. A therapist evaluating a married PDA clientmay need to assess his or her client’s marital interaction patterns with his or her partner and adjust hisintervention accordingly.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".