What has happened to the practice of short term dynamic psychotherapy in Australia’s mental health services? A multidisciplinary training programme in Western Sydney
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Short term psychodynamic psychotherapies have been markedly phased out of Australia's mental health services. This paper aims to describe the successful introduction of a Conversational Model of Short Term Intensive Psychodynamic Psychotherapy into a public health service in an attempt to revive its practice. METHOD: A brief review of relevant papers in the Royal Australian & New Zealand College of Psychiatrists journals since 1980 gives a background to the decline of dynamic psychotherapy in Australia. The development of a Conversational Model of Short Term Intensive Psychodynamic Psychotherapy in the author's private practice over 20 years, and its introduction into a hospital-based training programme are described. RESULTS: A structured programme by scholarship has been offered yearly since 2011 to 10 multidisciplinary mental health clinicians of the Western Sydney Health District. Trainees see two patients from their own service. Over three years, 29 trainees have treated 57 patients with weekly supervision provided. CONCLUSIONS: The model has been easily learned. Trainees report a sense of re-invigoration, refinement of existing skills and acquisition of new skills. Resolution of problems in a significant number of patients is noted and improvement and satisfaction reported by others. A valuable service is provided and research is underway.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".