MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170032060 · doi:10.1177/070674370404900403

Advances in Psychotherapy Education

2004· review· en· W2170032060 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Paula Ravitz, Ivan Silver

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumCompetence (human resources)PsychologyInterpersonal communicationPsychotherapistMedical educationCognitionClinical PracticeMedicinePsychiatryPedagogyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acquiring expertise in psychotherapy is central to the professional development of psychiatrists able to employ a broad therapeutic repertoire in their clinical practice. This article reviews how postgraduate psychiatry programs address this important aspect of training. We present the results of a national survey of psychotherapy education in Canadian psychiatry residency programs. The results highlight significant advances over the past decade in curriculum, in teaching methods, and in evaluation. These include training in evidence-based, manualized, time-limited therapies such as cognitive-behavioural and interpersonal therapy, greater attention to evaluating competence, and integrating electronic technology. Trends and advances in postgraduate and continuing medical psychotherapy education programs are considered in association with principles of adult learning. Health education research endorses the provision of longitudinal training programs that integrate learning and practice. We discuss issues related to the development of expertise, the importance of educational communities of practitioners, and the importance of attending to both educational process and outcomes, with a view to more effectively translating psychotherapy practice guidelines into sustained improvements in practice behaviours.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations39
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207