MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2574296707 · doi:10.1177/0264619616671976

Exploring the effects of group therapy for the visually impaired

2017· article· en· W2574296707 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Visual Impairment · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)MedicinePhysical therapyRehabilitationPerceived Stress ScaleStress (linguistics)Rating scalePsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individuals with visual impairments may experience varying levels of stress due to their vision loss. This study investigated the effectiveness of a brief stress management group therapy intervention for visually impaired individuals. The measure for evaluating participants’ stress levels was the Calgary Symptoms of Stress Inventory (C-SOSI), and overall well-being was measured via the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS). The study evaluated 36 participants, all experiencing varying levels of vision loss, recruited from a regional vision rehabilitation center. Approximately half of the participants were men (16) and half were women (20). The mean age of participants was 48.2 years (standard deviation [ SD] = 12.9 years). This was a predominately African American sample (72%). The C-SOSI was administered before and after participation in an 8-week stress management group. The ORS was administered at every session. Well-being was significantly increased during the first round of the intervention ( p = .02). No statistically significant decreases for stress during the first round of the intervention were observed. Those that enrolled in the intervention for a second round of treatment had a significant decrease for stress ( p = .001), but not for well-being. Overall, hypotheses were partially supported. Stress scores decreased during both rounds of the intervention; a significant reduction in stress scores was found for those individuals in the second round of the intervention. Well-being also increased during both rounds of the intervention; a significant increase was found only for the first round of the intervention. These results may suggest that individuals need approximately 16 weeks of the intervention to experience significant reductions in their stress levels. The results and implications of the current treatment protocol are discussed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.303 · 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