MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312060001 · doi:10.1177/00332941221146707

Equine-Assisted Therapy for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Among First Responders

2022· article· en· W4312060001 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Nelson, Kimberly W. Dossett, Deanna L. Walker

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindfulnessAnxietyPsychologyClinical psychologyDistressDepression (economics)Exposure therapyIntervention (counseling)Posttraumatic stressPsychotherapistAcceptance and commitment therapyFeelingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Equine-assisted therapy has emerged as an adjunctive integrative health modality in treating individuals experiencing physiological and psychological distress. However, limited research exists to assess the efficacy of such treatments as a possible adjunct to psychological treatment for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in first responders. The current pilot study examines the additive benefits of equine-assisted exposure for first responders suffering occupational incapacitation from operational-related trauma. Seven first responders participated in an 8-week, 90-minute, equine-assisted therapy program. Primary outcome measures (i.e., anxiety, depression, trauma, inflexibility and avoidance) were administered pre- and post-intervention. Additional measures examined feelings about the self and views towards aspects of the program. Findings suggested initial support for symptom reduction, particularly for depressive and trauma-related symptoms. Qualitative feedback from participants suggested significant benefits including increased sense of peace, reduced anxiety, mindfulness, and increased trust in the self and others. To our knowledge, this is the first study to directly examine clinical outcomes of first responders with PTSD participating in equine-assisted therapy and presents a promising adjunct to care in first responders moving forward.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.404
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ReportsSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207