MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315454590 · doi:10.1097/yct.0000000000000221

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy as a Treatment for Electroconvulsive Therapy Phobia

2015· article· en· W2315454590 on OpenAlex
Nolan King Hop Wo, Brendan D. Guyitt, Richard R. Owen

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ect · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroconvulsive therapyPsychotherapistPsychologyCognitive therapyCognitionCognitive behavioral therapyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) can raise feelings of fear and anxiety in our patients. No documented cases of phobia regarding ECT or its treatment were found in the literature. METHODS: We present a patient who developed anxiety regarding ECT that was severe enough to be classified as a phobia. She was successfully treated with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for her phobia and was subsequently able to tolerate ECT. We conducted a literature review of ECT phobia, fear, and anxiety using MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and EMBASE. RESULTS: We outlined how CBT, in our specific case, was helpful in treating extreme and unrealistic fears concerning ECT. We could not find a case of phobia related to ECT in the literature; however, both qualitative and quantitative studies illustrate that ECT causes anxiety and fear. CONCLUSIONS: Although cases of ECT phobia are rare, feelings of fear and anxiety surrounding ECT are common. The experience of ECT is individualized for each patient, and CBT can be a successful treatment in those who have anxiety related to ECT.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.288 · 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