The Efficacy of Brief Object Relations Psychotherapy on Major Depressive Disorder Comorbid with Cluster C personality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background; Personality disorders have essential roles in developing and maintaining depressive episodes,though psychotherapies must approach both symptoms and personality problems. This study examined the efficacy of Brief Object Relations Psychotherapy on depression severity and perceived quality of life of women suffer from major depressive disorder comorbid with cluster C personality disorders. Methods: by purposive sampling method, 6 subjects which met the in/exclusion criteria, were participated in a single subject design study randomly. Interventions were arranged based on A/B with follow up design. Each subject completed Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and original McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire (MQOL) every session during 3 baseline, 15 treatment and 3 follow up assessments sessions. Results: Patients totally reached 55% remission in depression severity with mean effect size 1.92 and 43% remission in perceived quality of life with mean effect size 2.08. Gains were maintained in follow up. Conclusion: The efficacy of Brief Object Relations Psychotherapy was statistically and clinically significant. Perceived quality of life reached to normal range, whereas cluster C personality disorders resistance remission from depression.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".