Psychotherapies at a Glance: Consensus Guideline–Recommended Psychotherapies for Adults With Psychiatric Disorders
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
Clinical decision making by psychiatrists and informed consent by patients require knowledge of evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) and their indications. However, many mental health professionals are not versed in the empirical literature on EBPs or the consensus guideline recommendations derived from this literature. The authors compared rigorous national consensus guidelines for EBP treatment of DSM-defined adult psychiatric disorders—derived from well-conducted randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses and from expert opinions from the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada—to create the Psychotherapies-at-a-Glance tool. Recommended EBPs are cognitive-behavioral therapy, family therapy, contingency management, dialectical behavior therapy, eye movement desensitization reprocessing, interpersonal psychotherapy, mentalization-based treatment, motivational interviewing, peer support, problem-solving therapy, psychoeducation, short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy, and 12-step facilitation. The Psychotherapies-at-a-Glance tool summarizes the indications, rationales, and therapeutic tasks that characterize these differing psychotherapies and psychosocial treatments. The tool is intended for use in clinical teaching, treatment planning, and patient communications.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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