Evaluation of a cognitive psychophysiological model for management of tic disorders: an open trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tic disorders, in particular chronic tic disorder and Tourette syndrome, affect about 1% of the population. The current treatment of choice is pharmacological or behavioural, addressing tics or the premonitory urges preceding tic onset. AIMS: The current study reports an open trial evaluating the effectiveness of a cognitive psychophysiological treatment addressing Tourette-specific sensorimotor activation processes rather than the tic. METHOD: Forty-nine people with Tourette syndrome and 36 people with chronic tics completed 10 weeks of individual cognitive psychophysiological therapy. Outcome measures included two tic severity scales and psychosocial measures. RESULTS: Post-treatment both groups had significantly improved on the tic scales with strong effect sizes across tic locations and complex and simple tics, maintained at 6-month follow-up with further change in perfectionism and self-esteem. CONCLUSIONS: The cognitive psychophysiological approach targeting underlying sensorimotor processes rather than tics in Tourette's and chronic tic disorder reduced symptoms with a large effect size.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".