MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407431731 · doi:10.1080/00029157.2016.1163662

Cognitive Hypnotherapy for Accessing and Healing Emotional Injuries for Anxiety Disorders

2016· review· en· W2407431731 on OpenAlexaff
Assen Alladin

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Hypnosis · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyPsychotherapistCognitionPsychologyClinical psychologyMindfulnessPsychodynamicsCognitive therapyCognitive behavioral therapyIntervention (counseling)Cognitive restructuringHypnosisPsychiatryMedicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although anxiety disorders on the surface may appear simple, they often represent complex problems that are compounded by underlying factors. For these reasons, treatment of anxiety disorders should be individualized. This article describes cognitive hypnotherapy, an individual comprehensive treatment protocol that integrates cognitive, behavioral, mindfulness, psychodynamic, and hypnotic strategies in the management of anxiety disorders. The treatment approach is based on the self-wounds model of anxiety disorders, which provides the rationale for integrating diverse strategies in the psychotherapy for anxiety disorders. Due to its evidence-based and integrated nature, the psychotherapy described here provides accuracy, efficacy, and sophistication in the formulation and treatment of anxiety disorders. This model can be easily adapted to the understanding and treatment of other emotional disorders.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.380 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical HypnosisSame topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207