MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120317888 · doi:10.7202/031585ar

Thérapie cognitive béhaviorale des psychoses

2006· article· fr· W2120317888 on OpenAlexaffvenue
David Fowler, Phillippa Garety

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté mentale au Québec · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesGynecologyMedicinePsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bien que la médication neuroleptique ait démontré son efficacité pour le traitement des psychoses, les interventions psychologiques auprès des personnes qui en souffrent ont encore un rôle important à jouer. Les chiffres varient mais on estime qu'entre le quart et la moitié des personnes avec un diagnostic de schizophrénie souffrent de symptômes persistants, comme les délires et les hallucinations, qui provoquent de la détresse et interfèrent dans leur fonctionnement malgré la prise de médicaments (Fowler et al., 1995). Les rechutes se produisent souvent même chez les patients qui se conforment au régime de médication et plusieurs personnes sont réticentes à une médication suivie sur une longue période à cause de ses effets secondaires déplaisants et même débilitants. Ces dernières années, le développement de la thérapie cognitive béhaviorale (TCB) a connu un intérêt croissant pour les personnes atteintes de psychoses qui continuent d'éprouver des symptômes psychotiques malgré un traitement continu de médication anti-psychotique. La TCB des psychoses tente d'aborder directement ces structures de comportements, de pensées et de réactions émotionnelles qui sous-tendent et maintiennent les délires et les hallucinations graves et persistants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté mentale au QuébecSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207