Moving Forward: A new internet-delivered program integrating life review therapy and self-compassion may lessen depression and anxiety in people facing life transitions
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
Life Review Therapy (LRT) is an evidence-based treatment for depression in the elderly. Some evidence suggests that LRT may be helpful for any individual going through a life transition as people tend to reminisce during such times. Preliminary findings also support the guided online delivery of LRT. The reflective nature of the therapy may however be challenging in the absence of clinical guidance. Self-compassionate writing may facilitate this reflective process. The present study examined the feasibility of a new Internet-delivered LRT based on self-compassion called Moving Forward for the management of life transitions among adults. Twenty participants were included in the analyses. The intervention is a 6-week program including psychoeducation and writing exercises related to reminiscence activities, life review therapy, self-compassion and best possible self. Most participants (71.4%) completed at least four of the six weeks of therapy. An attrition rate of 28.6% was obtained. Acceptability was high with 93.3% of the participants who reported that the program was worth their time. Mixed effect models analyses revealed significant and large pre-post treatment reductions in depression. Gains were maintained at a 3-month follow-up. Overall, the results support the feasibility of the Moving Forward program. A randomized controlled trial is needed to assess its efficacy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it