BACH´S FLOWER REMEDIES IN PATIENT WITH A HISTORY OF SEXUAL ABUSE: CASE REPORT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: According to the World Health Organization (WHO), child sexual abuse is regarded as one of the greatest public health problems. Psychological and emotional effects of sexual abuse can be devastating to the survivors and social and relationship problems arising from this abuse can persist well into adulthood4. Objective: This case study reports on the treatment effects of Bach’s flower remedies on a 21 years old, female patient with a history of sexual abuse living in Brazil. Methods: Treatment consisted of remedies comprised of six flower essences that were selected each month over a four-month time period. Data were collected using two open-ended questions that explored the effect of the remedies on the patient’s physical, cognitive, emotional and spiritual health as well as her perceptions about the positive and negative aspects of using Bach’s flower remedies. Qualitative content analysis was conducted. Results: Over the course of the intervention, the patient reported a significant improvement in her emotional well-being, being able to have a “good laugh” and no longer feeling ashamed of being happy. Also she started pursuing dating relationships throughout the period of treatment. Conclusion: Bach’s flower remedies may be a promising intervention for individuals who have experienced childhood sexual abuse and have experienced difficulties in developing relationships. In this case study, a female sexual abuse survivor reported Bach’s flower remedies as having beneficial effects with regards to her willingness to engage in dating behaviour and pursue the possible establishment of intimate relationships.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".