Shared mental healthcare and somatization: changes in patient symptoms and disability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To describe the symptoms and functional changes in patients with high levels of somatization who were referred to an outpatient, multidisciplinary, shared mental healthcare (SMHC) service that primarily offered cognitive behavioural therapy. Second, we wished to compare the levels of somatization in this outpatient clinical sample with previously published community norms. BACKGROUND: Somatization is common in primary care, and it can lead to significant impairment, disproportionate resource use, and poses a challenge for management. METHODS: All the patients (18+ years, n=508) who attended three or more treatment sessions in SMHC primary care over a seven-year period were eligible for inclusion to this pre-post study. Self-report measures included the Patient Health Questionnaire's somatic symptom severity scale (PHQ-15) and the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS II). Normative comparisons were used to assess the degree of symptoms and functional changes. FINDINGS: Clinically significant levels of somatization before treatment were common (n=138, 27.2%) and were associated with a significant reduction in somatic symptom severity (41.3% reduction; P<0.001) and disability (44% reduction; P<0.001) after treatment. Patients' levels of somatic symptom severity and disability approached but did not quite reach the community sample norms following treatment. Multidisciplinary short-term SMHC was associated with significant improvement in patient symptoms and disability, and shows promise as an effective treatment for patients with high levels of somatization. Including a control group would allow more confidence regarding the conclusions about the effectiveness of SMHC for patients impaired by somatization.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".