The Effect of a Combined Versus a Conventional Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy on Quality of Life for Comorbid Panic Disorder With Agoraphobia and Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concurrent panic disorder with agoraphobia (PDA) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are the most common diagnostic occurrences among anxiety disorders. This particular comorbidity is associated with significant impairments in quality of life (QOL). The current study sought to investigate the efficacy of a combined cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy that addressed both conditions compared with a conventional psychotherapy, which attends solely to the primary disorder. The hypotheses postulated firstly, that both treatment conditions would lead to improvements in participants' QOL and secondly, that the combined therapy would lead to greater QOL ameliorations. Twenty-five participants with comorbid PDA/GAD diagnoses were evaluated with a number of clinical interviews and self-report questionnaires, and were provided with either conventional or combined cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy, which consisted of 14 one-hour weekly sessions. Participants were once again evaluated in the same fashion 2-weeks after the completion of the psychotherapy. The results revealed that both conditions led to significant improvements in participants' QOL, but that the two groups did not significantly differ in terms of the effect on QOL. The results also reveal that the two conditions did not significantly differ in terms of their effect on PDA and GAD symptomatology or psychiatric comorbidity. The results demonstrate that the combined psychotherapy, which addresses both conditions simultaneously, is similar to the conventional psychotherapy employed for the primary disorder in terms of QOL enhancement, symptom severity, and comorbidity reduction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".