Efficacy of two versions of emotion-focused therapy for resolving child abuse trauma
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 and compared emotion-focused therapy for trauma (EFTT) with imaginal confrontation (IC) of perpetrators (n=20) and EFTT with empathic exploration (EE) of trauma material (n=25). Clients were women and men with histories of different types of childhood maltreatment (emotional, physical, and sexual abuse; emotional neglect). Clients were randomly assigned to treatment condition. Outcome measures assessed symptom distress, self and interpersonal problems, and abuse resolution. Results indicated statistically and clinically significant improvements on eight measures at posttest, maintenance of gains at follow-up, and no statistically significant differences between conditions. There were higher rates of clinically significant change in IC and a lower attrition rate for EE (7% vs. 20%). More severe personality pathology negatively influenced some dimensions of outcome, particularly in EE.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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