The Healing Through Ongoing Psychological Empowerment Telehealth Intervention With Two Spirit, Transgender, and Nonbinary Clients of Color in the United States: Open Clinical Trial Feasibility and Implementation Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There is a notable lack of psychotherapeutic services tailored to the needs of Two Spirit, transgender, and nonbinary (2STNB) people of color; research indicates that 2STNB clients who are people of color report a lack of competence and cultural humility on the part of their therapists. Objective: The purpose of this study was to report the feasibility and acceptability of the Healing Through Ongoing Psychological Empowerment (HOPE) teletherapy intervention using deductive content analysis. Methods: We used an open clinical trial design (testing one intervention without a comparison group) to test the feasibility and acceptability of the HOPE intervention. At baseline, 51 clients were enrolled in the open clinical trial, with 49 2STNB clients who are people of color starting and completing the HOPE intervention. Clients were recruited primarily from social media and therapist waitlists. Clients completed up to 15 free face-to-face telehealth psychotherapy sessions that were provided by nine 2STNB therapists who are people of color. Feasibility and acceptability interviews were conducted prior to the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and at 6 months after completing the intervention. Results: The HOPE intervention demonstrated high feasibility and acceptability, specifically regarding data collection, psychometric adequacy, interventionist recruitment or training or retention, delivery of the intervention, acceptability of the intervention to clients, and client engagement with the intervention. Conclusions: These findings propose HOPE as a potentially feasible, culturally specific therapeutic approach for the 2STNB community who are people of color. Future randomized controlled trials comparing HOPE to existing evidence-based treatments are needed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".