MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“The Ickiness Factor:” Case Study of an Unconventional Psychotherapeutic Approach to Pediatric OCD

2014· article· en· W95971023 on OpenAlexaff
Justine Dembo

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Psychotherapy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychotherapistPsychologySerotonergicPsychosocialAllianceExposure and response preventionCognitionPsychiatryClinical psychologyMedicineSerotoninInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a complex condition with biological, genetic, and psychosocial causes. Traditional evidence-based treatments include cognitive-behavioural therapy, either alone or in combination with serotonin-specific reuptake inhibitors (SSRI's), other serotonergic agents, or atypical antipsychotics. These treatments, however, often do not lead to remission, and therefore, it is crucial to explore other less conventional therapeutic approaches. This paper describes a case study in which psychodynamic, narrative, existential, and metaphor therapy in combination with more conventional treatments led to a dramatic remission of severe OCD in a 12 year old hospitalized on a psychiatric inpatient unit. The paper, which is written partly in the form of a story to demonstrate on a meta-level the power of narrative, is also intended to illustrate the challenges of countertransference in the treatment of patients with severe OCD, and the ways in which a reparative therapeutic alliance can lead to unexpected and vital change.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PsychotherapySame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207