Residency Training in Intensive Short-Term Dynamic Psychotherapy: Methods and Cost-Effectiveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CME Educational Objectives 1. Understand the role of training in psychodynamic psychotherapy in psychiatry residency training programs. 2. Learn a potential model for training residents in a short-term model of psychodynamic psychotherapy. 3. Review the efficacy and cost-savings data in a study training residents in this model. Whereas psychiatry grows as a field through contributions from neuroscience, genetics, psychopharmacology, and diagnostic specificity, psychiatrists continue to value the importance of psychodynamic assessment and intervention. This is reflected in the current Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada 1 and American College of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) guidelines in psychiatry, 2 requiring the demonstration of competency in psychodynamic psychotherapy. This has been further underscored through the roll out of the Next Accreditation System, 3 requiring faculty in psychiatry training programs to delineate the achievement of resident milestones in the area of psychodynamic psychotherapy.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".