MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391480008 · doi:10.1017/s1041610223003770

P158: Efficacy of a self-help cognitive-behavioral therapy (GSH-CBT) guided by lay providers for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in older adults: preliminary results

2023· article· en· W4391480008 on OpenAlexaff
Sébastien Grenier, Philippe Landreville, Patrick Gosselin, Pierre‐Hugues Carmichael

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Psychogeriatrics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité de SherbrookeCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux de la Vieille-CapitaleUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralized anxiety disorderWorryAnxietyClinical psychologyPsychologyRandomized controlled trialCognitive behavioral therapyCognitionPsychiatryMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background:Only a small proportion of older adults with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) seek professional help. One reason is the lack of access to mental health professionals licensed to provide psychotherapy. One way to improve access to psychotherapy is through guided self- help (GSH). GSH based on the principles of cognitive-behavior therapy (GSH-CBT) can be guided by trained lay providers (LPs). The purpose of this poster is to report preliminary results from a multisite randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy of a GSH-CBT guided by LPs for GAD in older adults.Methods:The sample included 150 participants (≥ 60 years old) with a diagnosis of threshold or subthreshold GAD randomly assigned to: 1) GSH-CBT guided by LPs (n = 75) or 2) waiting list (n = 75). The GSH-CBT lasted 15 weeks. Participants used a manual presenting weekly reading and at-home exercises. They also received weekly support calls (30 minutes maximum) by LPs (undergraduate psychology students) supervised by psychologists. Repeated-measures regression models were used to compare changes in the groups before and after 15 weeks on three outcomes: severity of GAD symptoms (Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item; GAD-7), tendency to worry (Penn State Worry Questionnaire; PSWQ), and level of anxiety (Geriatric Anxiety Inventory; GAI).Results:At the first assessment, both groups were similar in terms of age, sex, level of education, marital status, occupation, and did not differ significantly on outcomes. The GSH- CBT group decreased significantly on all three outcomes (GAD-7: -4.8, 95% CI [-5.7, -3.8], PSWQ: -11.7; 95% CI [-13.6, -9.9], GAI: -5.3 95% CI [-6.5, -4.1]) while the waiting list group remained stable over 15 weeks (GAD-7: -0.3, 95% CI [-1.2, 0.6], PSWQ: 0.7; 95% CI [-1.2, 2.5], GAI: -0.7 95% CI [-1.9, -0.5]).Conclusions:GSH-CBT guided by LPs appears to be an effective intervention for reducing severity of GAD symptoms, tendency to worry, and level of anxiety in older people with GAD. Further analyses will be conducted to test whether the intervention differs in efficacy between participants with a threshold vs. subthreshold GAD. The maintenance of long-term gains (6 and 12 months after the intervention) will also be tested.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational PsychogeriatricsSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207