MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240871578 · doi:10.4324/9780203962152-11

CP for obsessive-compulsive disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder

2007· book-chapter· en· W4240871578 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology Press eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObsessive compulsiveTraumatic stressPsychologyPosttraumatic stressPsychotherapistClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two OCD (DSM-III) patients with marked checking rituals who had not improved after much ftf guidance in exposure and ritual prevention improved when they were given OCCheck to use on a laptop computer at home and on a handheld (palmtop) computer carried outside the home in order to facilitate compliance (Table 3.1: Baer et al., 1987, 1988). They worsened when they did not use the computers and improved again on reinstating use of the computer. Two other patients refused to use OCCheck. This is an interactive-voice-response (IVR) system which OCD patients reach by phoning a toll-free number to a computer while looking at an accompanying workbook. The 800 or so voice ®les of BTSteps (BTS ) guide users to set and monitor individually tailored self-exposure and ritual prevention (ERP) homework, keep a diary, make baseline and later ratings, get feedback on progress, deal with dif®culties, and prevent relapse. BTS assumes an understanding/reading age of 11. BTS has been the subject of three open studies and two RCTs. Several studies were completed of BTS&s;s phone-IVR + workbook version in OCD patients in the UK, USA and Canada in varying proportions across different trials. An even more convenient internet version (OCFighter) using BTS&s;s phone-IVR algorithms will soon allow home access with no need for printed booklets and phone-IVR calls.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.004

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology Press eBooksSame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207