Practice of the Solution-Focused Approach in Outpatient Care for Adolescent Emotional Disorders: A Conversational Analysis Study in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims to study the process and characteristics of doctor-patient conversations in outpatient clinics for adolescent emotional disorder patients with the solution-focused approach (SFA). A qualitative study was carried out in an adolescent mood disorder clinic of a mental illness hospital. The recorded doctor-patient dialogue interview transcriptions were collected and analyzed using conversation analysis. The results show that SFA outpatient clinics and traditional psychiatric outpatient clinics differ in structure and language use. Structurally, there is an additional pre-assessment process. In language use, many SFA-specific questioning methods are used, and traditional symptom-based interviewing is no longer dominant, making it distinct from traditional general outpatient clinics that focus only on patient disease symptoms. Overall, the study highlights the effectiveness and value of SFA in outpatient settings, offering valuable insights to psychiatrists and benefiting adolescent patients through a more positive and strengths-based treatment approach.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".