Becoming Therapeutic Agents: A Grounded Theory of Mothers' Process When Implementing Cognitive Behavioural Therapy at Home with an Anxious Child
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The premise of parent-centred programmes for parents of anxious children is to educate and train caregivers in the sustainable implementation of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) in the home. The existing operationalization of parent involvement, however, does not address the systemic, parent or child factors that could influence this process. The qualitative approach of grounded theory was employed to examine patterns of action and interaction involved in the complex process of carrying out CBT with one's child in one's home. A grounded theory goes beyond the description of a process, offering an explanatory theory that brings taken-for-granted meanings and processes to the surface. The theory that emerged from the analysis suggests that CBT implementation by mothers of anxious children is characterized by the evolution of mothers' perception of their child and mothers' perception of their role as well as a shift from reacting with emotion to responding pragmatically to the child. Changes occur as mothers recognize the crisis, make links between the treatment rationale, child's symptoms and their own parenting strategies, integrate tenets of CBT for anxiety and eventually focus on sustaining therapeutic gains through natural life transitions. The theory widens our understanding of mothers' role, therapeutic engagement, process, and decision-making. The theory also generates new hypotheses regarding parent involvement in the treatment of paediatric anxiety disorders and proposes novel research avenues that aim to maximize the benefits of parental involvement in the treatment of paediatric anxiety disorders. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. KEY PRACTITIONER MESSAGE: Mothers of anxious youth who take part in parent-centred programmes experience a shift in their perception of the child and of their role. Parental strategy after CBT implementation shifts from emotional empathy to cognitive empathy. Mothers experience significant challenges and require additional support in prevention of relapse and knowledge translation.
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 | 0.018 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".