Obsessive-compulsive disorder among individuals of Hispanic and Latin American ancestry: Cultural considerations for assessment and psychotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research specific to obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) among individuals of Hispanic and Latin American (H/L) ancestry is limited, as are culturally relevant assessment and treatment recommendations. This article discusses the implications of underrepresentation of H/L populations in OCD research and emphasizes the need to consider issues related to assessment, treatment, and structural barriers that hinder delivery of culturally appropriate first-line psychotherapy. Recommendations for assessment and treatment are provided to aid clinicians in distinguishing culturally normative thoughts and behaviors from OCD, as well as to inform the implementation of psychotherapeutic interventions with cultural humility. This manuscript offers recommendations for future research to tackle health equity concerns with respect to assessment and treatment and structural factors limiting access to culturally appropriate psychotherapy. Wide-scale efforts are needed to comprehensively understand how H/L cultures intersect with various OCD presentations and to further disseminate treatments to populations that have historically lacked access to mental health care.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".