MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2211691645 · doi:10.1037/a0039773

Mediators of change in the Child/Adolescent Anxiety Multimodal Treatment Study.

2015· article· en· W2211691645 on OpenAlexaff
Philip C. Kendall, Colleen M. Cummings, Martina K. Narayanan, Kimberli R. H. Treadwell, Boris Birmaher, Scott Compton, John Piacentini, Joel Sherrill, John T. Walkup, Elizabeth Gosch, Courtney Keeton, Golda S. Ginsburg, Cindy Suveg, Anne Marie Albano

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionNational Institute of Mental HealthPfizer PharmaceuticalsNational Institutes of HealthTourette Association of AmericaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsPsychologyAnxietyClinical psychologyCoping (psychology)Test anxietyDevelopmental psychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Test changes in (a) coping efficacy and (b) anxious self-talk as potential mediators of treatment gains at 3-month follow-up in the Child/Adolescent Anxiety Multimodal Treatment Study (CAMS). METHOD: Participants were 488 youth (ages 7-17; 50.4% male) randomized to cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT; Coping cat program), pharmacotherapy (sertraline), their combination, or pill placebo. Participants met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria for generalized anxiety disorder, social phobia, and/or separation anxiety disorder. Coping efficacy (reported ability to manage anxiety provoking situations) was measured by youth and parent reports on the Coping Questionnaire, and anxious self-talk was measured by youth report on the Negative Affectivity Self-Statement Questionnaire. Outcome was measured using the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (completed by Independent Evaluators blind to condition). For temporal precedence, residualized treatment gains were assessed at 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Residualized gains in coping efficacy mediated gains in the CBT, sertraline, and combination conditions. In the combination condition, some unique effect of treatment remained. Treatment assignment was not associated with a reduction in anxious self-talk, nor did anxious self-talk predict changes in anxiety symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that improvements in coping efficacy are a mediator of treatment gains. Anxious self-talk did not emerge as a mediator.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.264
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.263
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations113
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Consulting and Clinical PsychologySame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207