MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115133677 · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.75.3.447

Relationship of posttreatment decentering and cognitive reactivity to relapse in major depression.

2007· article· en· W2115133677 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyReactivity (psychology)MoodDepression (economics)FeelingCognitionClinical psychologyDysfunctional familyCognitive therapyAntidepressantPsychotherapistPsychiatryAnxietyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Z. V. Segal et al. (2006) demonstrated that depressed patients treated to remission through either antidepressant medication (ADM) or cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), but who evidenced mood-linked increases in dysfunctional thinking, showed elevated rates of relapse over 18 months. The current study sought to evaluate whether treatment response was associated with gains in decentering-the ability to observe one's thoughts and feelings as temporary, objective events in the mind-and whether these gains moderated the relationship between mood-linked cognitive reactivity and relapse of major depression. Findings revealed that CBT responders exhibited significantly greater gains in decentering compared with ADM responders. In addition, high post acute treatment levels of decentering and low cognitive reactivity were associated with the lowest rates of relapse in the 18-month follow-up period.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.369 · 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