Improving Romantic Relationship Functioning Among Young Men With First-Episode Psychosis: Impact of a Novel Group Intervention
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research has highlighted many of the challenges faced by individuals with psychosis in romantic relationships. The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of a novel group intervention for men with first-episode psychosis (FEP) on dating success, romantic and sexual functioning, self-esteem, self-stigma, mentalizing skills, and symptomatology, while using a repeated single-case experimental design and comparing results across two treatment modalities (i.e., in-person or online). Twenty-seven participants from five treatment sites completed a 12-week group intervention. Qualitative data was also collected to assess participants' subjective experiences with the program. In both modalities, significant improvements were observed for romantic functioning, mentalizing skills, and symptomatology, with effect sizes ranging from small to large. Several participants also attended more dates and entered committed relationships after the intervention. Most participants were satisfied with the program and many felt that they had learned new skills and gained confidence in dating. Future research should replicate these findings in larger and more inclusive samples.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it