Disgust Recognition in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Diagnostic Comparisons and Posttreatment Effects
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether disgust recognition deficits are present and specific to obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and the extent to which this deficit, if present, can be reduced in cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT). METHOD: Responses to the Pictures of Facial Affect (POFA) were examined in patients with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, diagnosed OCD (n = 20), panic disorder with agoraphobia (PDA; n = 15), and generalized social phobia (GSP; n = 15) and a second, independent OCD sample of treatment responders to CBT (n = 11). RESULTS: There were significant and statistically large disgust recognition differences between the OCD group and comparison PDA and GSP groups. However, patients with OCD treated with CBT showed disgust recognition scores that were equivalent to the PDA and GSP groups, significantly better than the untreated OCD sample, and equivalent to scores from the original POFA nonaffected standardization sample. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide support for the presence of disgust recognition impairment in OCD, and provide preliminary evidence that disgust recognition impairments may improve with treatment.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it