MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208429394 · doi:10.2196/33776

Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy With Follow-Up Sessions for Pharmacotherapy-Refractory Anxiety Disorders: Protocol for a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· article· en· W3208429394 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mitsuhiro Sado, Akira Ninomiya, Maki Nagaoka, Akihiro Koreki, Naho Goto, Yohei Sasaki, Chie Takamori, Teppei Kosugi, Masashi Yamada, Sunre Park, Yasunori Sato, Daisuke Fujisawa, Atsuo Nakagawa, Masaru Mimura

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Agency for Medical Research and Development
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMindfulness-based cognitive therapyAnxietyPanic disorderCognitive therapyMindfulnessMedicineAttendanceClinical trialPhysical therapyPsychiatryPsychologyClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Augmented mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) with treatment as usual (mainly pharmacotherapy) is reported to be effective after treatment for anxiety disorders. However, whether its effectiveness persists in the long term is unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of a follow-up program by conducting a feasibility randomized controlled trial (RCT) that compares augmented MBCT with follow-up sessions and that without follow-up sessions in preparation for a definitive RCT. METHODS: The study involves an 8-week MBCT with a 10-month follow-up. Patients aged 20 to 65 years who meet the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV) criteria for panic disorder, agoraphobia, or social anxiety disorder, which is not remitted with usual treatment for at least 4 weeks, will be included in the study and randomly allocated to receive augmented MBCT with follow-up sessions or augmented MBCT without follow-up sessions. For this feasibility RCT, the primary outcomes are (1) study inclusion rate, (2) dropout rate, (3) attendance rate, and (4) mean and standard deviation of several clinical measures at 8 weeks and 5, 8, and 12 months. RESULTS: We started recruiting participants in January 2020, and 43 participants have been enrolled up to January 2021. The study is ongoing, and data collection will be completed by May 2022. CONCLUSIONS: This study is novel in terms of its design, which compares augmented MBCT with and without follow-up sessions. The limitations of the trial are as follows: (1) mixed participants in terms of the delivery mode of the intervention, and (2) lack of a pharmacotherapy-alone arm. Owing to its novelty and significance, this study will provide fruitful knowledge for future definitive RCTs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000038626; https://tinyurl.com/2p9dtxzh. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/33776.

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)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.010

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.574
Teacher spread0.379 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207