MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Group Therapy for Patients With Medical Illness

2020· review· en· W3093489476 on OpenAlex
Molyn Leszcz

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Psychotherapy · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsSinai Health System
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllianceDiseaseMedicinePsychotherapistCLARITYBreast cancerGroup psychotherapyMedical illnessPsychiatryPsychologyCancerIllness behaviorInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article aims to review the expanding role of group psychotherapy in the treatment of individuals with medical illnesses, an area that has expanded dramatically during the past 30 years. The fundamental principles of adaptation of group therapies for specialized clinical populations are articulated. Clarity of goals and thoughtful alignment with patient interests and needs are at the heart of building a strong therapeutic alliance and potentiate the effectiveness of group therapy. This article also discusses the conceptual underpinnings of group therapies and the ways in which group therapeutic factors gain expression with these clinical populations. This article also focuses on breast cancer, in light of its clinical prominence and the development of group therapies for individuals with the disease. These therapies address clinical concerns for women along the continuum of the disease, including familial and genetic predisposition, primary breast cancer, adaptation to illness and its treatment, metastatic disease, and dealing with mortal illness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.341 · 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