MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887092719 · doi:10.3390/bs8080076

Action-Centered Exposure Therapy (ACET): A New Approach to the Use of Virtual Reality to the Care of People with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

2018· article· en· W2887092719 on OpenAlexafffund
Sorelle Audrey Kamkuimo, Mathilde Fossaert, Benoît Girard, Bob-Antoine J. Ménélas

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsExposure therapyExploitTraumatic stressDysfunctional familyPsychologyPsychotherapistDistressMindsetHabituationAction (physics)Coping (psychology)Virtual Reality Exposure TherapyAnxietyClinical psychologyComputer sciencePsychiatryArtificial intelligenceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) can be seen as the result of dysfunctional beliefs that associate stimuli with a danger or a threat leading to anxious reactions. Exposure therapy is so far considered to be the most effective treatment, and research suggests that it is mainly based on a habituation process. Based on learning theories, it appears that a passive systemic exposure to traumatic stimuli should not be the best option for the treatment of PTSD. We hypothesis that an active learning of safer and healthier coping strategies combined with systematic exposure should be more effective in reducing the psychological distress associated with PTSD. In this paper, we describe the theoretical foundations of this approach that focuses on the action and activity of the patient in his or her exposure environment. In this approach, we take advantage of Virtual Reality technologies and learning mechanics of serious games to allow the patient to learn new safe associations while promoting the empowerment. We named this action-centered exposure therapy (ACET). This approach exploits behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism learning theories. With the different benefits of virtual reality technologies, this approach would easily integrate with in-virtuo exposure therapy and would allow us to exploit as much as possible the enormous potential of these technologies. As a first step toward validation, we present a case study that supports the ACET approach.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.331
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.116 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral SciencesSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207