MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4285391807 · doi:10.2196/32950

Online Guided Self-help Cognitive Behavioral Therapy With Exposure to Anxiety and Problem Solving in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Case Study

2022· article· en· W4285391807 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dorian Kern, Brjánn Ljótsson, Marianne Bonnert, Nils Lindefors, Martin Kraepelien

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionHypoglycemiaAnxietyMedicineCognitionIntervention (counseling)Type 2 diabetesType 2 Diabetes MellitusClinical psychologyDiabetes mellitusCognitive behavioral therapyType 1 diabetesPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is dependent on self-care to avoid short- and long-term complications. There are several problem areas in diabetes that could be addressed by psychological interventions, such as suboptimal problem-solving strategies and fear of hypoglycemia. There is empirical support for a few psychological interventions, most often cognitive behavioral therapy, with various treatment aims. However, these interventions are largely unavailable in regular diabetes health care. Online guided self-help cognitive behavioral therapy could help achieve greater outreach. OBJECTIVE: We tested a manualized treatment in the early stage for further development, with the long-term aim to increase access to care. The purpose of this report was to show the potential of this newly developed online intervention by describing 2 illustrative cases. METHODS: An online guided self-help cognitive behavioral therapy protocol featuring problem solving and exposure was developed. The treatment was administered from a secure online platform and lasted for 8 weeks. Case 1 was a male participant. He had a number of diabetes-related complications and was worried about his future. He reported that he had a general idea that he needed to change his lifestyle but found it difficult to get started. Case 2 was a female participant. She had fear of hypoglycemia and unhelpful avoidance behaviors. She kept her blood glucose levels unhealthily high in order to prevent hypoglycemic episodes. Furthermore, she avoided contact with diabetes health care. RESULTS: The 2 participants showed clinically significant improvements in their most relevant problem areas. In case 1, the participant's blood glucose levels reduced, and he was able to establish healthy routines, such as increase physical exercise and decrease overeating. In case 2, the participant's fear of hypoglycemia greatly decreased, and she was able to confront many of her avoided situations and increase necessary visits to her diabetes clinic. Treatment satisfaction was high, and no adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to deliver a cognitive behavioral therapy intervention aimed at problem areas in diabetes online. Problem solving appears to help with problems in everyday routines and lifestyle choices. Exposure to aversive stimuli appears to be a plausible intervention specifically aimed at the fear of hypoglycemia. Larger and controlled studies are needed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicDiabetes Management and Education→French-language works237,207→