MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231322637 · doi:10.1176/ps.2009.60.11.1540

Population-Based Service Planning for Implementation of MBCT: Linking Epidemiologic Data to Practice

2009· article· en· W4231322637 on OpenAlexaffabout
Scott B. Patten, Graham M Meadows

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Services · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindfulness-based cognitive therapyPopulationMindfulnessMedicinePsychologyCognitive therapyPsychiatryClinical psychologyCognitionEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study explored population-based service planning for mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT). Evidence suggests the usefulness of MBCT in relapse prevention for individuals reporting three or more major depressive episodes.Depression data were from the Canadian Community Health Survey. A simulation model estimated recurrence rates and population sizes to sustain MBCT therapists (each conducting two ten-person groups per year).Approximately 4.2% of the population are candidates for MBCT, and about 13 candidates would arise annually per 10,000 population. If MBCT was acceptable to 20%, for example, a population of 200,000 could support two therapists.A large proportion of the population is eligible for MBCT introduction; however, after introduction, the rate of emergence of candidates would yield a smaller patient pool, which may limit implementation in small population centers. Treatment acceptability is a key variable. These analyses highlight the potential value of epidemiologic data and simulation modeling in planning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.383 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric ServicesSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207