The Role of Posttraumatic Growth in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Cognitive–Behavioral Conjoint Therapy for PTSD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Posttraumatic growth (PTG) is defined as a positive psychological change that can emerge following a traumatic life event. Although documented in noninterventional studies of traumatized individuals, there are scant data on the potential for therapy to induce or improve PTG. Thus, the primary goal of this study was to examine changes in PTG in a controlled trial of cognitive-behavioral conjoint therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder versus waitlist (CBCT for PTSD; Monson & Fredman, 2012). We also examined whether pretreatment relationship satisfaction and PTSD symptomatology moderated change in PTG. There were 40 couples (75% with a female partner with PTSD) who were randomized to either immediate CBCT for PTSD or a 3-month waitlist (WL). Compared to WL, individuals who received treatment immediately demonstrated a significant increase in PTG. There was a moderate effect size between-group difference (Hedge's g = 0.45). There was a nonsignificant relationship with a moderate effect size (Hedge's g = 0.65) for the positive effect of pretreatment relationship satisfaction on the trajectory of PTG, but no effect of pretreatment PTSD symptoms. Results suggested that CBCT for PTSD facilitated PTG, even with a limited focus on PTG in this conjoint intervention. Future research should target PTG as a treatment goal and further examine the role of close others in facilitating development of PTG.
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 | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".