Treating posttraumatic stress disorder across cultures: A systematic review of cultural adaptations of trauma‐focused cognitive behavioral therapies
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: Although trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapies (CBTs) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have been applied worldwide, the nature of how these Western-based interventions are applied in diverse settings has varied. This paper systematically reviewed the literature on how trauma-focused CBTs have been applied and adapted cross-culturally. METHOD: A systematic review of studies that discuss the process of cultural adaptation of trauma-focused CBTs. RESULTS: Seventeen papers were included and varied in the comprehensiveness of the adaptation process. Two studies stated that a theoretical framework was followed. Almost one-third of the studies did not report whether local stakeholders were involved in the process of application. Fifteen studies examined the efficacy of the adaptations and the results were positive, but the methodology and quality varied. CONCLUSION: There are inconsistencies in how trauma-focused CBTs are culturally adapted. A systematic approach to the transportation of such therapies would enable greater investigation into the necessity and efficacy of such adaptations.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 it