MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111795312 · doi:10.1002/capr.12372

Videoconferencing at home for psychotherapy in the postpartum period: Identifying drivers of successful engagement and important therapeutic conditions for meaningful use

2020· article· en· W3111795312 on OpenAlex
Jennifer Hensel, Rebecca Yang, Simone N. Vigod, Laura Desveaux

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

VenueCounselling and Psychotherapy Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVideoconferencingThematic analysisPsychologyTherapeutic relationshipPsychotherapistPostpartum periodAnxietyMoodNursingMedicineClinical psychologyQualitative researchPsychiatryMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose Virtual care has almost become the norm since COVID‐19 mandated social distancing. Prior, the use of personal videoconferencing was being explored as an appealing option to overcome barriers to care, but little was studied about how we should do it and for whom. This study aimed to answer these questions for women receiving psychotherapy in the postpartum period when there are significant barriers to attending office‐based care. Methods Twelve postpartum women who had the option to attend their psychotherapy sessions for the treatment of mood and/or anxiety symptoms via videoconferencing over a 3‐month time period were interviewed about their experience. The three therapists providing care were also interviewed early in adoption of the virtual treatment and at the end of the study. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify themes for the initial and ongoing engagement with videoconferencing, which were triangulated with therapist input. Findings Major themes which emerged related to (a) initial willingness to engage with videoconferencing, (b) technological compatibility, and (c) a good patient fit, with positive and negative influencers for each. Therapeutic considerations were identified, including (a) an initial in‐person meeting when possible, (b) matching the therapy format to the clinical situation, (c) attention to the home environment, and (d) a clear therapy frame. Conclusions Therapists should consider that videoconferencing might not be appropriate for every patient; but in the right context and with appropriate therapeutic considerations, offering this treatment format may actually facilitate an individual's recovery. These findings can help to inform the future delivery of videoconferencing psychotherapy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.256 · 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