A training model for relatives and friends in cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) informed care for psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relatives and close friends provide life-long support as informal carers to those living with psychosis. We introduce a model for training informal carers in cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for psychosis, called Psychosis Recovery by Enabling Adult Carers at Home (Psychosis REACH). The model aims to address the carers’ own emotional needs and at the same time build their capabilities of promoting the recovery trajectory of the person they care for. We delivered two- and five-day workshops, underpinned by the Psychosis REACH model, to a cohort of 95 self-identified carers recruited via a charitable organisation in Canada. In a single-group before-and-after design, carers’ anxiety, depression and mental well-being significantly improved within a few days. A handful of carers who returned data for their cared-for-person after the end of training, observed either no change or a positive change in functioning. Our findings generated hypotheses that deserve further research to test whether training large groups of relatives and friends in CBT-informed care for psychosis can improve their anxiety, depression and mental well-being in the context of their caring role, as well as improve the functioning of those they care for.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".