MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P060 Pilot study showing the efficacy and acceptability of an acceptance and commitment therapy based brief psychological intervention on mood and disability in patients with early inflammatory arthritis

2021· article· en· W3157214609 on OpenAlexaff
Lorraine Maher‐Edwards, Nora Ng, David Gillanders

Bibliographic record

VenueLara D. Veeken · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutoimmune and Inflammatory Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAcceptance and commitment therapyMoodQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyAnxietyClinical psychologyPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)PsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background/Aims Psychiatric comorbidities are common in patients living with rheumatological conditions and are associated with poorer health outcomes and treatment response. The evidence base for psychological intervention is scarce and of poor quality. One trial has found CBT intervention early post-diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis has small to medium effect sizes for depression and anxiety and no effect on disability. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is a psychological therapy with a good evidence base for a number of long term health conditions. The target process in ACT is psychological flexibility, which relates closely to a number of positive life outcomes including adaptive response to illness and trauma. Psychological inflexibility has been shown to be associated with poorer function and psychological wellbeing in chronic pain populations and more recently juvenile idiopathic arthritis specifically. We aimed to evaluate outcomes for a sample (n = 12) of newly diagnosed (within 3 years of diagnosis) patients with inflammatory arthritis who underwent an individualised ACT intervention using patient satisfaction data, qualitative feedback and measures of mood, quality of life and psychological flexibility. Methods Patients received up to 7 sessions of one to one therapy. Outcome measures included PHQ-9, GAD-7, compACT, and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and a satisfaction questionnaire with open questions inviting qualitative responses. Paired t-tests were conducted, and the Jacobson and Truax method used to calculate Reliable Change Index and Clinically Significant Change criteria. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohens’ d. Correlation analysis was conducted using Pearsons correlation coefficients. Results Patients who took part in the brief intervention showed significant improvement in depression, anxiety, quality of life and psychological flexibility. Effect sizes were large. Correlation analysis showed strong correlations between PF and both depression and quality of life. Changes in PF from baseline to end of therapy strongly correlated with changes in depression and disability, and moderately correlated with anxiety. Subanalyses will be presented to understand which particular components of PF most closely relate to improvements in outcomes on disability and mood. Conclusion A brief one to one ACT-based psychological intervention conferred good benefit for a rheumatology population. Results suggest PF is a key therapeutic target in psychological interventions for people with arthritis and that ACT is a viable, highly acceptable and promising alternative to CBT in this population. More studies are needed to understand whether this effect is generalisable and longer-term outcomes. Disclosure L. Maher-Edwards: None. N. Ng: None. D. Gillanders: None.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLara D. VeekenSame topicAutoimmune and Inflammatory Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207