Outcomes in a Referral Cohort of Patients with Anxiety Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study describes 6- and 12-month outcomes in a referral cohort with anxiety disorders and identifies treatment and prognostic factors related to these outcomes. Patients were recruited at three general hospital clinics, two psychologist-run clinics, and one psychiatric hospital clinic. Outcomes included severity of symptoms, physical and mental health status, and subjective global change in problem severity. Of 254 patients eligible for follow-up, 165 (65.0%) completed a follow-up questionnaire. Methods of treatment included consultation with return to the primary care physician (38.2%); or continued treatment at the clinic, with medications (16.4%), psychotherapy (22.4%), or both (23.0%). Both severity of symptoms and mental health status improved but remained abnormal at follow-up. In multiple logistic regression, subjective global improvement was related to a diagnosis of panic disorder only, treatment with psychotherapy, and type of referral. Change over time in symptom severity was related to clinic type, and change over time in mental health was related to clinic type and duration of previous treatment.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".