An Open-Label Feasibility Trial Examining the Effectiveness of a Cognitive Training Program, Goal Management Training, in Individuals With Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is associated with dysfunction across multiple cognitive domains including executive functioning, attention, and verbal memory. This dysfunction is associated with negative impacts on functional outcomes (e.g., work or social functioning) and reduced response to psychotherapy for PTSD. Despite this knowledge, little work has investigated the efficacy of cognitive remediation strategies in improving cognition and functional outcomes among individuals with PTSD. OBJECTIVE: The current study investigated the efficacy of an established cognitive remediation program, Goal Management Training (GMT), in improving cognitive functioning in a pilot sample of individuals with PTSD symptoms in an inpatient treatment setting. METHOD: 16). The TAU+GMT group received neuropsychological assessment at baseline and posttreatment, while both the TAU+GMT and TAU groups received assessment with clinical self-report measures at baseline and posttreatment. RESULTS: Paired-sample t-tests revealed significant improvements on measures of executive functioning (e.g., response inhibition, cognitive flexibility), processing speed, sustained attention, and verbal memory in the TAU+GMT group. Mixed-design analyses of variance (ANOVAs) revealed a trend toward an interaction effect indicating potentially greater improvements on a measure of the ability to engage in goal-directed behaviors while highly emotional in the TAU+GMT group as compared to the TAU group. DISCUSSION: The results of this small feasibility investigation of GMT in PTSD point toward the potential efficacy of GMT in ameliorating cognitive difficulties in individuals with PTSD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".