Sustained Reduction in Health Care Service Usage after Adjunctive Treatment of Intensive Short-Term Dynamic Psychotherapy in Patients with Bipolar Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in long-term health care costs and symptom severity after adjunctive intensive short-term dynamic psychotherapy (ISTDP) individually tailored and administered to patients with bipolar disorder undergoing standard psychiatric care. Eleven therapists with different levels of expertise delivered an average of 4.6 one-hour sessions of ISTDP to 29 patients with bipolar disorders. Health care service costs were compiled for a one-year period prior to the start of ISTDP along with four one-year periods after termination. Two validated self-report scales, the Brief Symptom Inventory and the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems, were administered at intake and termination of ISTDP. Hospital cost reductions were significant for the one-year post-treatment period relative to baseline year, and all cost reductions were sustained for the follow-up period of four post-treatment years. Self-reported psychiatric symptoms and interpersonal problems were significantly reduced. These preliminary findings suggest that this brief adjunctive psychotherapy may be beneficial and cost-effective in select patients with bipolar disorders, and that gains may be sustained in long-term followup. Future research directions 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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".