Description, Implementation, and Efficacy of the Comprehensive Behavioral Intervention for Tics as First-Line Treatment for Tourette and Other Tic Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To provide an evidence-based review of the Comprehensive Behavioral Intervention for Tic (CBIT) disorders. Results: For close to a century, behavioral interventions for managing tics associated with Tourette and other tic disorders (TDs) were incorrectly considered ineffective and dangerous by the professional community, due, in large part, to unfounded fears that efforts to suppress tics would lead to a host of negative psychological, and even physical, outcomes (e.g., symptom substitution, tic rebound). Spurred by a growing body of research to the contrary, the Comprehensive Behavioral Treatment for Tics (CBIT) was developed to provide a tolerable and effective nonpharmacological treatment option, alone or in combination with medication, for youth and adults with tics associated with Tourette or other TDs. CBIT combines two evidence-based practices, habit reversal training (HRT) to address the urge-tic relationship and a functional intervention to identify and neutralize tic-related environmental factors. Based on positive findings from two large-scale randomized controlled trials that involved a total of 248 8–69-year olds with Tourette or chronic TD, CBIT has been designated as a first-line treatment, when available, for treating tics by the American Academy of Neurology and the European and Canadian medical academies. Conclusions: CBIT has demonstrated acute and durable efficacy when delivered alone or in combination with medication, in person, or via telehealth, and in the presence or absence of common comorbid conditions. Additional research is needed to develop and test treatment guidelines for the use of CBIT in combination with pharmacologic, neuromodulatory, and other intervention modalities.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".