Motivational Enhancement as a Pretreatment to a Transdiagnostic Intervention for Emerging Adults with Emotion Dysregulation: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: New approaches are needed to help the large number of emerging adults (EA) presenting with early-stage mental health problems. The goal of this pilot study was to carry out a randomized controlled trial to investigate whether motivational enhancement therapy (MET) improved the treatment effects of a 12-week psychological intervention, Dialectical Behaviour Therapy Skills Training (DBT-ST), for EA presenting in the early stages of mental health difficulties. Participants were recruited from the Youth Wellness Centre at St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton and McMaster University's Student Wellness Centre in Hamilton, Canada. METHODS: Seventy-five participants were randomized to receive MET followed by DBT-ST or to DBT-ST alone. We assessed psychological distress, emotion dysregulation, and depression and anxiety symptoms as outcomes. RESULTS: We found that both treatment groups had significant reductions in emotional dysregulation, psychological distress, depression, and anxiety at post-treatment and at the three-month follow-up. Participants assigned to MET pre-treatment experienced greater improvement in psychological distress at the end of treatment. CONCLUSION: This pilot study provides preliminary evidence of the potential augmentation of DBT-ST using MET in a real-world setting. Future studies should examine whether MET uniquely augments DBT-ST through the use of a comparable pre-treatment control group.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 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".