Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral conjoint therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in a U.S. Veterans Affairs PTSD clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive behavioral conjoint therapy (CBCT) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a 15-session conjoint treatment for PTSD designed to improve PTSD symptoms and enhance intimate relationship functioning. Numerous studies of CBCT for PTSD document improvements in patient PTSD and comorbid symptoms, partner mental health, and relationship adjustment. However, little is known about its effectiveness in real-world clinical settings. Using an intention-to-treat sample of couples who participated in CBCT for PTSD in an outpatient U.S. Veterans Affairs (VA) PTSD clinic (N = 113), trajectories of session-by-session reports of veterans' PTSD symptoms and both partners' relationship happiness were examined. Across sessions, there were significant reductions in veteran-rated PTSD symptoms, d = -0.69, and significant increases in veteran- and partner-rated relationship happiness, ds = 0.36 and 0.35, respectively. Partner ratings of veterans' PTSD symptoms increased before significantly decreasing, d = -0.24. Secondary outcomes of veteran and partner relationship satisfaction, ds = 0.30 and 0.42, respectively; veteran and partner depressive symptoms, ds = -0.75 and -0.29, respectively; and partner accommodation of PTSD symptoms, d = -0.44, also significantly improved from pre- to posttreatment. The findings suggest that CBCT for PTSD was effective for decreasing PTSD and comorbid symptoms in veterans, as well as for improving relationship functioning and partners' mental health, among a sample of real-world couples seeking treatment in a VA PTSD specialty clinic.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".