MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220667672 · doi:10.1037/fam0000976

An uncontrolled trial of couple HOPES: A guided online couple intervention for PTSD and relationship enhancement.

2022· article· en· W4220667672 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Candice M. Monson, Anne Catherine Wagner, Alexander O. Crenshaw, Kristen M. Whitfield, Cait Martin Newnham, Robert Valela, Sonya Varma, Alyssa A. Di Bartolomeo, Lindsay Fulham, Alexis Collins, Victoria Donkin, Desiree H. Mensah, Meredith S. H. Landy, Christina Samonas, Leslie A. Morland, Brian D. Doss, Skye Fitzpatrick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Psychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistère de la Défense Nationale
KeywordsPsycINFOPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialPosttraumatic stressCognitive behavioral therapyPsychotherapistPsychiatryCognitionMEDLINEMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

= .62). There were similar results found in the completer sample. There were no adverse events and high satisfaction with the intervention in those who completed the evaluation. These findings provide additional initial data on the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of Couple HOPES. The similarities of intent-to-intervene and completer results, as well as the need for randomized controlled trial designs to test Couple HOPES, are discussed. (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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.389 · 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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family PsychologySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207