Evaluation of a culturally adapted cognitive behavior therapy-based, third-wave therapy manual
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recommendations for psychotherapy have evolved over the years, with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) taking precedence since its inception within clinical guidelines in the United Kingdom and United States. The use of CBT for severe mental illness is now more common globally. AIM: To investigate the feasibility and acceptability of a culturally adapted, CBT-based, third-wave therapy manual using the Comprehend, Cope, and Connect approach with individuals from a diverse population presenting to primary and secondary healthcare services. METHODS: A pilot study was used to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the manualised intervention. Outcome measures were evaluated at baseline, post-intervention and 12 wk-follow up. 32 participants with mental health conditions aged 20-53 years were recruited. Assessments were completed at three time points, using Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Bradford Somatic Inventory and World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS). The Patient Experience Ques-tionnaire was completed post-treatment. RESULTS: = 0.38 respectively. CONCLUSION: These results indicate the effectiveness and acceptability of the culturally adapted, CBT-based, third-wave therapy manual intervention among minoritized groups with moderate effect sizes. Satisfaction levels and acceptability were highly rated. The viability and cost-effectiveness of this approach should be explored further to support universal implementation across healthcare systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".