Investigation of Emotional Expression Processing Following Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Patients with Schizophrenia: An Event-Related Potentials Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growing evidence supports the use of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for psychosis, including CBT for voices (CBTv), which targets auditory verbal hallucinations (AVH). The present study observed the effects of CBTv on electrophysiological measures of facial expression processing in patients with schizophrenia with AVH. Twenty-five patients with schizophrenia were randomly assigned to a treatment group (TG; n = 14) or a treatment as usual (TAU) group (n = 11). The TG received group CBTv for five-six months in addition to their TAU. The matched waitlist group received TAU for the five-six months. The CBTv treatment showed shorter P100 latency in response to facial expressions following treatment compared with baseline, but not the TAU group. Amount of negative content of voices and “omnipotence” of voices were modified following CBTv treatment, but not following TAU. This study provides evidence that CBTv decreases early visual information processing time as indexed by the P100 latency.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".