Adapted Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Adolescents with Self-injurious Thoughts and Behaviors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore clinical changes observed in suicidal adolescents treated with an adapted form of Dialectical Behavior Therapy for adolescents (A-DBT-A) in a tertiary care setting. We conducted an open-label naturalistic study including 61 adolescents with self-injurious thoughts and behaviors and associated features of borderline personality disorder, who underwent a 15-week course of A-DBT-A. Pre- and post-treatment measures were administered, the primary outcome being the total score on the Suicidal Ideas Questionnaire. Self-harm, symptoms of borderline personality disorder, resiliency measures, predictors of response, and predictors of attrition were also explored. Among participants who completed post-treatment measures, we found a significant reduction in suicidal ideation (n = 31, p < 0.001). Secondary outcomes also suggested improvement. Baseline substance use predicted attrition (HR 2.51; 95% CI 1.03-6.14; p < 0.05), as did baseline impulsivity score on the Life Problems Inventory (HR 1.03; 95% CI 1.004-1.06; p < 0.05). Overall, we observed clinical improvements in adolescents receiving A-DBT-A.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".