A Case Study of Person with Schizophrenia with Auditory Hallucinations (Voices) – A Cognitive Behavioral Case Work Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Effective psychosocial treatment like cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) is needed for quick recovery from schizophrenia. The applicability of CBT for schizophrenia has many applications to social work practice. Aim: The aim of the present study was to manage auditory hallucination using cognitive behavioural case work study approach. Methodology: It uses a single subject design and compares pre and post -intervention baseline data with that following intervention. Psychiatric social work assessment using – social history Performa, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scales (BPRS), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), The Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia, Psychotic Symptoms Rating Scales (PSYRATS), Family Assessment Device (FAD). Based on the assessment, psychiatric social work intervention was provided to patient and family members, which includes psycho education, Cognitive Behavior therapy and family intervention. Results: There was change in the pre and post score of psychotic symptoms, anxiety, depression and hallucinations (voices). Psychotic Symptoms were significantly reduced with treatment of client with cognitive behavior case work intervention and medication Patient understanding level of illness was improved, distorted beliefs about hallucination was modified, client was able to cope with distressing symptoms.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".