Body dysmorphic disorder: a treatment synthesis and consensus on behalf of the International College of Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders and the Obsessive Compulsive and Related Disorders Network of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) is characterized by a preoccupation with a perceived appearance flaw or flaws that are not observable to others. BDD is associated with distress and impairment of functioning. Psychiatric comorbidities, including depression, social anxiety, and obsessive-compulsive disorder are common and impact treatment. Treatment should encompass psychoeducation, particularly addressing the dangers associated with cosmetic procedures, and may require high doses of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors* (SSRI*) and protracted periods to establish full benefit. If there is an inadequate response to SSRIs, various adjunctive medications can be employed including atypical antipsychotics*, anxiolytics*, and the anticonvulsant levetiracetam*. However, large-scale randomized controlled trials are lacking and BDD is not an approved indication for these medications. Oxytocin* may have a potential role in treating BDD, but this requires further exploration. Cognitive-behavioural therapy has good evidence for efficacy for BDD, and on-line and telephone-assisted forms of therapy are showing promise. CBT for BDD should be customized to address such issues as mirror use, perturbations of gaze, and misinterpretation of others' emotions, as well as overvalued ideas about how others view the individual.
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 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 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it