MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331203200 · doi:10.1177/0093854815624513

Can Institutionalized Adolescent Females With a Substantiated History of Sexual Abuse Benefit From Cognitive Behavioral Treatment Targeting Disruptive and Delinquent Behaviors?

2016· article· en· W2331203200 on OpenAlexaff
Eveline van Vugt, Nadine Lanctôt, Annie Lemieux

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNorth Carolina Pork Council
KeywordsAngerClinical psychologyPsychologySexual abusePsychological interventionCognitionPoison controlPsychiatryInjury preventionMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study examined to what extent adolescent females in residential care with a substantiated history of sexual abuse can benefit from a cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) targeting disruptive and delinquent behaviors. In total, 104 adolescent females in the treatment group and 78 adolescent females in the comparison group were included in the evaluative design. Latent growth models (LGM) were performed to model change in adolescent females’ conduct and anger problems. In the short term, 3 months after the treatment, adolescent females with sexual abuse experiences receiving CBT showed stronger declines in trait anger and anger expression compared with the other groups. Furthermore, in the long term, 18 months after admission, this group of females showed larger declines in proclivity for trading sex compared with the other groups. Results are discussed in the light of the “what works” literature for effective interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.339
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminal Justice and BehaviorSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207