MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385669338 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2023.269

A Pilot Study Comparing a Community of Practice Group Therapy Program with and without Concurrent Ketamine-assisted Therapy

2023· article· en· W4385669338 on OpenAlexaff
Vivian W. L. Tsang, R. Moyer, Pamela Kryskow, Zach Walsh, Shannon Dames

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General HospitalVancouver Island University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyDepression (economics)ChecklistRepeated measures designMental healthGroup psychotherapyMedicineKetamineAnalysis of varianceClinical psychologyPsychiatryPsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Healthcare practitioners (HCPs) are facing a mental health crisis. Group therapies have long been used to treat symptoms associated with PTSD, anxiety and/or depression, however no studies have investigated the role of implementing group therapy with and without ketamine-assisted therapies (KaT). Objectives The current study investigated the effects of the Roots to Thrive (RTT) group therapy intervention both with and without adjunctive KaT. Methods In the present study we conduct a secondary analysis of data derived from the 12-week group psychotherapy program to that of the same program with adjunct KaT. Participants were administered a series of validated psychiatric assessment tools before and after the 12-weeks. Inclusion criteria included a diagnosis of treatment resistant mental health condition (depression, PTSD and/or generalized anxiety disorder) and a score of 15 or greater on the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). To assess the effects of time x group interaction and calculate differences between the RTT only and RTT-KaT subgroups, a repeated measures ANOVA was conducted. Effect sizes were calculated through partial eta-squared. Results Forty-nine HCPs with treatment-resistant PTSD, anxiety and/or depression were treated with the RTT group therapy model to target their symptoms. A total of 49 individuals (34 female, 10 male, 3 other) with a median age of 47 years old (SD 14.19) participated in the study. There were no statistically significant differences between RTT only (n=14) and RTT KaT (n=35) subgroups across gender [X2 (1, N=44) = 2.84, ns] or age [F (1, 36) = .257, p = .615]. From pre- to post-treatment, all patients showed significant reductions in scores of PTSD (from 39.3 to 20.99), depression (from 15.5 to 7.7) and anxiety (from 15.5 to 6.2). Two-way repeated measures ANOVA did not reveal any significant between-group differences between the RTT and RTT-KaT subgroups. Conclusions This observational study provides preliminary support for the potential of the RTT community of care model of group therapy and adds to a small but growing body of knowledge on the integration of group therapy and the broad category of psychedelic psychotherapies. Given the rapid proliferation and expansion of KaT clinics throughout North America, the finding that KaT did not appear to impact changes related to the RTT intervention suggests the need for further research to better explain the potential impacts of relational transference between the two groups, and the distinct contributions of ketamine administration in a group therapy context. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207