Transdiagnostic Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Versus Treatment as Usual in Adult Patients With Emotional Disorders in the Primary Care Setting (PsicAP Study): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Demand for primary care (PC) services in Spain exceeds available resources. Part of this strong demand is due to the high prevalence of emotional disorders (EDs)-anxiety, depression, and somatic symptom disorders-and related comorbidities such as pain or chronic illnesses. EDs are often under- or misdiagnosed by general practitioners (GPs) and, consequently, treatment is frequently inadequate. OBJECTIVE: We aim to compare the short- and long-term effectiveness of group-delivered transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral therapy (TD-CBT) versus treatment as usual (TAU) in the treatment of EDs in the PC setting in Spain. We also aim to compare the effect of these treatments on disability, quality of life, cognitive-emotional factors, and treatment satisfaction. METHODS: Here we present the study design of a two-arm, single-blind, randomized controlled trial (N=1126) to compare TAU to TD-CBT for EDs. TAU will consist primarily of pharmacological treatment and practical advice from the GP while TD-CBT will be administered in seven 90-minute group sessions held over a period ranging from 12 to 14 weeks. Psychological assessments are carried out at baseline (ie, pretreatment); posttreatment; and at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. The study is conducted in approximately 26 PC centers from the National Health System in Spain. RESULTS: This study was initiated in December 2013 and will remain open to new participants until recruitment and follow-up has been completed. We expect all posttreatment evaluations to be completed by December 2017, and follow-up will end in December 2018. CONCLUSIONS: We expect the TD-CBT group to have better results compared to TAU on all posttreatment measures and that this improvement will be maintained during follow-up. This project could serve as a model for use in other areas or services of the National Health System in Spain and even in other countries. CLINICALTRIAL: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 58437086; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN58437086 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6mbYjQSn3).
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 | 0.033 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 0.011 |
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".