MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413976470 · doi:10.1080/01612840.2025.2519335

The Effect of a Psychodrama-Based Group Intervention on Anger and Self-Injurious Behaviors in Adolescents Diagnosed with Substance Use Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4413976470 on OpenAlexaff
Cemile Teke, Merve Şahin, Ege Anlı

Bibliographic record

VenueIssues in Mental Health Nursing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology, Coaching, and Therapy
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychodramaAngerRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyPsychologyPsychotherapistGroup psychotherapySubstance usePsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Psychodrama, a psychotherapy involving dramatization and role-playing, promotes insight and behavioral change. Recent studies highlight its effectiveness in treating adolescents with substance use disorders by enhancing psychological support in clinical settings.Objective This study examined the effects of psychodrama-based group work on anger and self-injury behaviors in adolescents with substance use disorders.Methods A randomized controlled trial with 43 adolescents (21 experimental, 22 control) was conducted. The experimental group received psychodrama-based group sessions, while the control group received no intervention. Data were collected using the Trait Anger and Anger Expression Styles Scale (TAAESS) and the Inventory of Statements About Self Injury (ISAS).Results Compared to controls, the experimental group showed significantly lower post-test scores in total anger, trait anger, anger out, and anger in, along with higher anger control scores (p < 0.05). Self-injury behaviors measured by ISAS also decreased significantly (p < 0.05).Conclusion Psychodrama group work significantly reduced anger and self-injury behaviors in adolescents with substance use disorders. Integrating psychodrama into treatment is recommended to improve care outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.378 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIssues in Mental Health NursingSame topicPsychology, Coaching, and TherapyFrench-language works237,207