MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405224831 · doi:10.1093/jsxmed/qdae161.129

(159) HOMEWORK ADHERENCE IN MINDFULNESS-BASED COGNITIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR FEMALE SEXUAL DYSFUNCTION: A SCOPING REVIEW

2024· review· en· W4405224831 on OpenAlexaff
Fernanda Rafaela Cabral Bonato, Nicolas de Oliveira Cardoso, Lori A. Brotto

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindfulnessPsychological interventionPsychologySexual dysfunctionClinical psychologyFemale sexual dysfunctionPsychotherapistCognitionMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) emphasizes consistent at-home mindfulness exercises as a crucial method for developing mindfulness. Despite the availability of several tools to measure homework adherence in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), there is limited knowledge about assessing homework practice in MBCT studies focused on female sexual dysfunction (FSD). Objective This review aims to identify the most commonly used items and instruments for evaluating homework adherence in studies of MBCT for treating FSD, as well as to explore the types of homework typically assigned in these interventions. Methods Five databases-PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, Embase, and Web of Science-were searched using Thesaurus (PsycINFO) and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH/PubMed) to ensure a systematic search. To minimize selection bias, two raters reviewed all identified papers. The articles retrieved from these databases were then imported into Rayyan, a website used for managing the screening process. Results A total of 423 articles were identified through database searching, which was narrowed down to 30 that included any type of MBCT homework. The main findings indicate that there is no standardized instrument for assessing homework adherence during MBCT interventions for treating FSD, and most studies do not specify how they measure homework adherence. Of the nine studies that do report their assessment methods, six relied solely on ad hoc measures, while only three utilized psychometric instruments. Additionally, the most commonly prescribed homework included mindfulness exercises, psychoeducation, and CBT exercises. Conclusions This scoping review serves as a guide for researchers and health professionals to adapt or develop psychometric instruments for assessing homework adherence. Further research should prioritize creating psychometric instruments to evaluate homework adherence during FSD treatment. The review highlights a significant gap in instruments with robust psychometric properties for assessing homework adherence in MBCT treatments for FSD. Disclosure No.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0120.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.240
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207