Cognitive behavioural social skills training: Methods of a randomized controlled trial for youth at risk of psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Poor functioning has become a hallmark of many youth at clinical high-risk (CHR) of psychosis. Even for those who do not make the transition to psychosis remain troubled by functional deficits and a decline in functioning increases the odds of transitioning to psychosis. There are very few treatment studies that have attempted to improve social and role functioning. The aim of this paper is to describe the methods of a treatment study to address social and role functioning in CHR. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial of cognitive-behavioural social skills training (CBSST) versus a supportive therapy. CBSST combines elements of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) and social skills training (SST), two evidence-based treatments for schizophrenia. By adding CBT to SST to target functioning outcomes, SST can be used to train new social skills, and thoughts that interfere with skilled performance in the real world can be addressed using CBT. We developed an adapted version of CBSST, more appropriate for the age range and illness severity of typical CHR individuals, to attempt to show improvements in social and role functioning for these young people. RESULTS: Two hundred and three participants were recruited for this study. Results include initial baseline data. CONCLUSION: This article describes the baseline methodology of a CHR youth who have difficulties in social and/or role functioning. It is one of the first clinical trials to address this significant problem.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".