MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011435160 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v10n1p29

Patient Psychopathology and the Management of Clinical Dilemmas in Psychotherapy: A Qualitative Analysis of Clinical Decision-Making

2020· article· en· W3011435160 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sarah Bro Trasmundi, Marie Skaalum Bloch, Stine Steen Høgenhaug, Vicki T. Jensen, Katharina Kjølbye Wrist, Thomas Wiben Jensen, Sune Vork Steffensen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVelux Stiftung
KeywordsPsychopathologyPsychologyPsychotherapistClinical decision makingQualitative analysisClinical psychologyQualitative researchMedicineSociologyIntensive care medicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Clinical dilemma management is an important part of daily decision-making processes in psychotherapy, and hence important for the quality of mental healthcare. However, the situated particularities of such dilemmas have been given little systematic attention – both in research and in practice, even though an improved understanding of the nature of clinical dilemmas is a central key to managing dilemmas successfully. Method: Eight cases of authentic clinical dilemma management in psychotherapy have been analysed from the perspective of interaction analysis and psychopathology. The article uses video data and narrative interviews from a larger cognitive ethnography study conducted at a psychiatric Hospital in Denmark. Results: The analysis demonstrates how clinical dilemma management in psychotherapy is particularly difficult due to the nature of a patient’s psychopathology. Thus, it is often difficult to discern whether a given dilemma is intrinsically ethical, or if it is a manifestation of the patient’s pathology. Two overall interaction patterns were identified: In the first pattern, the therapist fails to manage the clinical decision-making in accordance with the therapeutic goal, which strengthens the patient’s psychopathological behaviour, for instance by giving in and do what the patient demands. In the second pattern, the therapist uses the situation as an opportunity to work with the patient’s psychopathological behaviour in situated interaction. Conclusion: This article presents a model for integrating an understanding of patient pathology into clinical and ethical decision-making. It establishes a window into how psychotherapists manage clinical dilemmas (successfully or not) through interaction. This illustration might impact on how we address, evaluate and understand clinical and ethical dilemma management, which again can contribute to the reduction of moral distress amongst healthcare practitioners, as well as amongst patients.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.540
Teacher spread0.432 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Developmental PsychologySame topicPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207