Effectiveness of a 6-Week Day Hospital Treatment for Personality Disorders: Data From a Naturalistic Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report on the effectiveness of a time-limited day-hospital crisis treatment for personality disorders (PDs) in a naturalistic setting. METHOD: Archival data from 260 patients diagnosed with PDs (202 female, 58 male) who completed a 6-week day-hospital treatment program between 2012 and 2015 were analyzed. Treatment was available upon referral by psychiatrists at local emergency rooms and short-term hospitalization units. Pre-post change was assessed using the Outcome Questionnaire (OQ-45.2). RESULTS: Patients significantly improved during treatment on the total OQ-45.2 scale and its 3 subscales. Pre-post changes yielded large effect sizes for the total OQ-45.2 scale and the Symptom Distress subscale, and moderate effect sizes for the Interpersonal Relations and Social Role subscales. Reliable change was observed for 55% of patients for the total scale. Younger patients (18 to 24 y of age) showed larger improvements on social role satisfaction than patients over the age of 30. Overall improvement was larger for patients engaged in social participation at the beginning of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study conducted in a naturalistic setting suggests that a time-limited, 6-week day-hospital treatment program tailored to patients wiith PDs may be effective in reducing overall symptomatology in patients experiencing a crisis episode.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it