MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Psychotherapies at a Glance: Consensus Guideline–Recommended Psychotherapies for Adults With Psychiatric Disorders

2024· article· en· W4392872697 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paula Ravitz, Luis E. Flores, Danielle M. Novick, Priya Watson, Holly A. Swartz

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Psychotherapy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychotherapistPsychologyPsychoeducationMotivational interviewingEvidence-based practicePsychosocialDialectical behavior therapyInterpersonal psychotherapyInterpersonal communicationPsychiatryRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionBorderline personality disorderMedicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.006

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PsychotherapySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207