Is respiratory sinus arrhythmia a modifiable index of symptom change in cognitive behavioral therapy for youth? A pooled-data analysis of a randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective We evaluated whether respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA) reactivity and resting RSA—physiological markers reflecting the increase in heart rate with inspiration and decrease during expiration related to parasympathetic influence on the heart—are modifiable and predict symptom change during youth psychotherapy. Methods: Diverse youth (N = 158; ages 7–15; 48.1% female) received the Modular Approach to Therapy for Children and completed pre-treatment (pre), post-treatment (post), and 18-months postbaseline (18Mo) assessments. We measured resting RSA, RSA reactivity during stress induction, and psychopathology symptoms. Results: Pre-to-post and pre-to-18Mo, reactivity decreased, and resting RSA increased. Changes in reactivity and resting RSA, separately, did not predict reduced psychopathology. Yet, decreased reactivity combined with increased resting RSA predicted reduced psychopathology over time, suggesting that observed RSA changes were beneficial for some. Higher dosage of a module utilizing slow-breathing, muscle-relaxation, and imagery predicted greater pre-to-18Mo changes in reactivity and resting RSA, whereas a similar module with less emphasis on slow-breathing did not. Conclusions: Findings raise the possibility that youth reactivity and resting RSA could be modifiable during cognitive behavioral therapy and contribute to the amelioration of psychopathology. More studies are needed to determine whether resting RSA and RSA reactivity are modifiable indices of symptom change in slow-breathing practices and psychotherapy.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03153904, registered May 15, 2017.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".