The temporal relationships between therapist adherence and patient outcomes in dialectical behavior therapy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) is a well-established evidence-based psychotherapy, little is known about the role of therapist adherence in promoting positive outcomes. This study evaluated the temporal relationships between therapist adherence to DBT and patient outcomes, as well as potential moderators of these relationships. METHOD: Data were from six clinical trials conducted in research and community settings with a variety of patient populations. In these trials, trained observers rated 83 therapists for adherence during 1,262 DBT individual therapy sessions with 288 patients. Patient outcomes included suicide attempts, nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI), treatment dropout, psychiatric hospitalizations, and global functioning. Longitudinal mixed-effects models evaluated the time-ordered, bidirectional relationships between adherence and outcomes. RESULTS: = .01, η = 0.26) predicted higher subsequent therapist adherence, and the latter relationship was moderated by patient population. CONCLUSIONS: Therapist adherence improves several key patient outcomes and retention, highlighting the importance of delivering DBT with adherence to the manual. Therapists may find it easier to deliver DBT adherently to more severely impaired patients. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".