MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153993926 · doi:10.1080/15299732.2015.1022925

Trauma-Related Altered States of Consciousness (TRASC) and Functional Impairment I: Prospective Study in Acutely Traumatized Persons

2015· article· en· W2153993926 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul Frewen, Nick J. Coupland, Brian H. Rowe, Richard W. J. Neufeld, Ruth A. Lanius

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Trauma & Dissociation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesAlberta HealthUniversity of AlbertaWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDistressPsychologyFunctional impairmentProspective cohort studyConsciousnessClinical psychologyPsychiatryDevelopmental psychologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A theoretical framework referred to as a 4-D model has been described for classifying posttraumatic stress symptoms into those potentially occurring within normal waking consciousness (NWC) versus those thought to intrinsically exemplify dissociative experiences, specifically, trauma-related altered states of consciousness (TRASC). As a further test of this theoretical distinction, this prospective study evaluated whether TRASC and NWC forms of distress incrementally and prospectively predicted functional impairment at 6 and 12 weeks following presentation at hospital emergency departments in the acute aftermath of traumatic events in 180 persons. Establishing the clinical significance of both TRASC and NWC-distress symptoms, we found that 6-week markers of TRASC and NWC-distress independently predicted 12-week self-reported levels of social and occupational impairment. We also observed broad support for various predictions of the 4-D model except that, in contrast with hypotheses, childhood trauma history was generally more strongly correlated with symptoms of NWC-distress than with TRASC. Future research directions are discussed.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Trauma & DissociationSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207