Moussab/ORKG-training-evaluation-set huggingface dataset:
Research field: Social and Behavioral Sciences
Title: A PISA-2015 Comparative Meta-Analysis between Singapore and Finland: Relations of Students’ Interest in Science, Perceived ICT Competence, and Environmental Awareness and Optimism
Abstract: <jats:p>The aim of the present study is twofold: (1) to identify a factor structure between variables-interest in broad science topics, perceived information and communications technology (ICT) competence, environmental awareness and optimism; and (2) to explore the relations between these variables at the country level. The first part of the aim is addressed using exploratory factor analysis with data from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) for 15-year-old students from Singapore and Finland. The results show that a comparable structure with four factors was verified in both countries. Correlation analyses and linear regression were used to address the second part of the aim. The results show that adolescents’ interest in broad science topics can predict perceived ICT competence. Their interest in broad science topics and perceived ICT competence can predict environmental awareness in both countries. However, there is difference in predicting environmental optimism. Singaporean students’ interest in broad science topics and their perceived ICT competences are positive predictors, whereas environmental awareness is a negative predictor. Finnish students’ environmental awareness negatively predicted environmental optimism.</jats:p>
Extracted statement — Has method: Linear Regression
Research field: Social Psychology
Title: Decision-making at the sharp end: a survey of literature related to decision-making in humanitarian contexts
Abstract: Abstract In a humanitarian response, leaders are often tasked with making large numbers of decisions, many of which have significant consequences, in situations of urgency and uncertainty. These conditions have an impact on the decision-maker (causing stress, for example) and subsequently on how decisions get made. Evaluations of humanitarian action suggest that decision-making is an area of weakness in many operations. There are examples of important decisions being missed and of decision-making processes that are slow and ad hoc. As part of a research process to address these challenges, this article considers literature from the humanitarian and emergency management sectors that relates to decision-making. It outlines what the literature tells us about the nature of the decisions that leaders at the country level are taking during humanitarian operations, and the circumstances under which these decisions are taken. It then considers the potential application of two different types of decision-making process in these contexts: rational/analytical decision-making and naturalistic decision-making. The article concludes with broad hypotheses that can be drawn from the literature and with the recommendation that these be further tested by academics with an interest in the topic.
Extracted statement — Domain: Humanitarian response
Research field: Sociology
Title: Problem solving treatment and group psychoeducation for depression: multicentre randomised controlled trial. Outcomes of Depression International Network (ODIN) Group
Abstract: Abstract Objectives: To determine the acceptability of two psychological interventions for depressed adults in the community and their effect on caseness, symptoms, and subjective function. Design: A pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial, stratified by centre. Setting: Nine urban and rural communities in Finland, Republic of Ireland, Norway, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Participants: 452 participants aged 18 to 65, identified through a community survey with depressive or adjustment disorders according to the international classification of diseases, 10th revision or Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition. Interventions: Six individual sessions of problem solving treatment (n=128), eight group sessions of the course on prevention of depression (n=108), and controls (n=189). Main outcome measures: Completion rates for each intervention, diagnosis of depression, and depressive symptoms and subjective function. Results: 63% of participants assigned to problem solving and 44% assigned to prevention of depression completed their intervention. The proportion of problem solving participants depressed at six months was 17% less than that for controls, giving a number needed to treat of 6; the mean difference in Beck depression inventory score was −2.63 (95% confidence interval −4.95 to −0.32), and there were significant improvements in SF-36 scores. For depression prevention, the difference in proportions of depressed participants was 14% (number needed to treat of 7); the mean difference in Beck depression inventory score was −1.50 (−4.16 to 1.17), and there were significant improvements in SF-36 scores. Such differences were not observed at 12 months. Neither specific diagnosis nor treatment with antidepressants affected outcome. Conclusions: When offered to adults with depressive disorders in the community, problem solving treatment was more acceptable than the course on prevention of depression. Both interventions reduced caseness and improved subjective function.
Extracted statement — Depression outcomes (sources): Beck Depression Inventory
Research field: Sociology
Title: Acute and one-year outcome of a randomised controlled trial of brief cognitive therapy for major depressive disorder in primary care
Abstract: Background The consensus statement on the treatment of depression (Paykel & Priest, 1992) advocates the use of cognitive therapy techniques as an adjunct to medication. Method This paper describes a randomised controlled trial of brief cognitive therapy (BCT) plus ‘treatment as usual’ versus treatment as usual in the management of 48 patients with major depressive disorder presenting in primary care. Results At the end of the acute phase, significantly more subjects (P < 0.05) met recovery criteria in the intervention group (n=15) compared with the control group (n=8). When initial neuroticism scores were controlled for, reductions in Beck Depression Inventory and Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression scores favoured the BCT group throughout the 12 months of follow-up. Conclusions BCT may be beneficial, but given the time constraints, therapists need to be more rather than less skilled in cognitive therapy. This, plus methodological limitations, leads us to advise caution before applying this approach more widely in primary care.
Extracted statement — Depressive disorder: Major depressive disorder
Research field: Sociology
Title: Treatment of dysthymia and minor depression in primary care: a randomized trial in patients aged 18 to 59 years
Abstract: OBJECTIVE The researchers evaluated the effectiveness of paroxetine and Problem-Solving Treatment for Primary Care (PST-PC) for patients with minor depression or dysthymia. STUDY DESIGN This was an 11-week randomized placebo-controlled trial conducted in primary care practices in 2 communities (Lebanon, NH, and Seattle, Wash). Paroxetine (n=80) or placebo (n=81) therapy was started at 10 mg per day and increased to a maximum 40 mg per day, or PST-PC was provided (n=80). There were 6 scheduled visits for all treatment conditions. POPULATION A total of 241 primary care patients with minor depression (n=114) or dysthymia (n=127) were included. Of these, 191 patients (79.3%) completed all treatment visits. OUTCOMES Depressive symptoms were measured using the 20-item Hopkins Depression Scale (HSCL-D-20). Remission was scored on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) as less than or equal to 6 at 11 weeks. Functional status was measured with the physical health component (PHC) and mental health component (MHC) of the 36-item Medical Outcomes Study Short Form. RESULTS All treatment conditions showed a significant decline in depressive symptoms over the 11-week period. There were no significant differences between the interventions or by diagnosis. For dysthymia the remission rate for paroxetine (80%) and PST-PC (57%) was significantly higher than for placebo (44%, P=.008). The remission rate was high for minor depression (64%) and similar for each treatment group. For the MHC there were significant outcome differences related to baseline level for paroxetine compared with placebo. For the PHC there were no significant differences between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS For dysthymia, paroxetine and PST-PC improved remission compared with placebo plus nonspecific clinical management. Results varied for the other outcomes measured. For minor depression, the 3 interventions were equally effective; general clinical management (watchful waiting) is an appropriate treatment option.
Extracted statement — Depressive disorder: Minor depression or dysthymia
Research field: Sociology
Title: Treatment of dysthymia and minor depression in primary care: a randomized trial in patients aged 18 to 59 years
Abstract: OBJECTIVE The researchers evaluated the effectiveness of paroxetine and Problem-Solving Treatment for Primary Care (PST-PC) for patients with minor depression or dysthymia. STUDY DESIGN This was an 11-week randomized placebo-controlled trial conducted in primary care practices in 2 communities (Lebanon, NH, and Seattle, Wash). Paroxetine (n=80) or placebo (n=81) therapy was started at 10 mg per day and increased to a maximum 40 mg per day, or PST-PC was provided (n=80). There were 6 scheduled visits for all treatment conditions. POPULATION A total of 241 primary care patients with minor depression (n=114) or dysthymia (n=127) were included. Of these, 191 patients (79.3%) completed all treatment visits. OUTCOMES Depressive symptoms were measured using the 20-item Hopkins Depression Scale (HSCL-D-20). Remission was scored on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) as less than or equal to 6 at 11 weeks. Functional status was measured with the physical health component (PHC) and mental health component (MHC) of the 36-item Medical Outcomes Study Short Form. RESULTS All treatment conditions showed a significant decline in depressive symptoms over the 11-week period. There were no significant differences between the interventions or by diagnosis. For dysthymia the remission rate for paroxetine (80%) and PST-PC (57%) was significantly higher than for placebo (44%, P=.008). The remission rate was high for minor depression (64%) and similar for each treatment group. For the MHC there were significant outcome differences related to baseline level for paroxetine compared with placebo. For the PHC there were no significant differences between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS For dysthymia, paroxetine and PST-PC improved remission compared with placebo plus nonspecific clinical management. Results varied for the other outcomes measured. For minor depression, the 3 interventions were equally effective; general clinical management (watchful waiting) is an appropriate treatment option.
Extracted statement — Setting: Primary care
Research field: Sociology
Title: A randomised controlled trial of cognitive behaviour therapy vs treatment as usual in the treatment of mild to moderate late life depression
Abstract: This study provides an empirical evaluation of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) alone vs Treatment as usual (TAU) alone (generally pharmacotherapy) for late life depression in a UK primary care setting.
Extracted statement — Setting: Primary care
Research field: Sociology
Title: Randomised controlled trial comparing problem solving treatment with amitriptyline and placebo for major depression in primary care
Abstract: Abstract Objective: To determine whether, in the treatment of major depression in primary care, a brief psychological treatment (problem solving) was (a) as effective as antidepressant drugs and more effective than placebo; (b) feasible in practice; and (c) acceptable to patients. Design: Randomised controlled trial of problem solving treatment, amitriptyline plus standard clinical management, and drug placebo plus standard clinical management. Each treatment was delivered in six sessions over 12 weeks. Setting: Primary care in Oxfordshire. Subjects: 91 patients in primary care who had major depression. Main outcome measures: Observer and self reported measures of severity of depression, self reported measure of social outcome, and observer measure of psychological symptoms at six and 12 weeks; self reported measure of patient satisfaction at 12 weeks. Numbers of patients recovered at six and 12 weeks. Results: At six and 12 weeks the difference in score on the Hamilton rating scale for depression between problem solving and placebo treatments was significant (5.3 (95% confidence interval 1.6 to 9.0) and 4.7 (0.4 to 9.0) respectively), but the difference between problem solving and amitriptyline was not significant (1.8 (−1.8 to 5.5) and 0.9 (−3.3 to 5.2) respectively). At 12 weeks 60% (18/30) of patients given problem solving treatment had recovered on the Hamilton scale compared with 52% (16/31) given amitriptyline and 27% (8/30) given placebo. Patients were satisfied with problem solving treatment; all patients who completed treatment (28/30) rated the treatment as helpful or very helpful. The six sessions of problem solving treatment totalled a mean therapy time of 3 1/2 hours. Conclusions: As a treatment for major depression in primary care, problem solving treatment is effective, feasible, and acceptable to patients. Key messages Key messages Patient compliance with antidepressant treatment is often poor, so there is a need for a psychological treatment This study found that problem solving is an effective psychological treatment for major depression in primary care—as effective as amitriptyline and more effective than placebo Problem solving is a feasible treatment in primary care, being effective when given over six sessions by a general practitioner Problem solving treatment is acceptable to patients
Extracted statement — Setting: Primary care
Research field: Sociology
Title: Randomised controlled trial of problem solving treatment, antidepressant medication, and combined treatment for major depression in primary care
Abstract: Abstract Objectives: To determine whether problem solving treatment combined with antidepressant medication is more effective than either treatment alone in the management of major depression in primary care. To assess the effectiveness of problem solving treatment when given by practice nurses compared with general practitioners when both have been trained in the technique. Design: Randomised controlled trial with four treatment groups. Setting: Primary care in Oxfordshire. Participants: Patients aged 18-65 years with major depression on the research diagnostic criteria—a score of 13 or more on the 17 item Hamilton rating scale for depression and a minimum duration of illness of four weeks. Interventions: Problem solving treatment by research general practitioner or research practice nurse or antidepressant medication or a combination of problem solving treatment and antidepressant medication. Main outcome measures: Hamilton rating scale for depression, Beck depression inventory, clinical interview schedule (revised), and the modified social adjustment schedule assessed at 6, 12, and 52 weeks. Results: Patients in all groups showed a clear improvement over 12 weeks. The combination of problem solving treatment and antidepressant medication was no more effective than either treatment alone. There was no difference in outcome irrespective of who delivered the problem solving treatment. Conclusions: Problem solving treatment is an effective treatment for depressive disorders in primary care. The treatment can be delivered by suitably trained practice nurses or general practitioners. The combination of this treatment with antidepressant medication is no more effective than either treatment alone. Key messages Problem solving treatment is an effective treatment for depressive disorders in primary care Problem solving treatment can be delivered by suitably trained practice nurses as effectively as by general practitioners The combination of problem solving treatment and antidepressant medication is no more effective than either treatment alone Problem solving treatment is most likely to benefit patients who have a depressive disorder of moderate severity and who wish to participate in an active psychological treatment
Extracted statement — Setting: Primary care
Research field: Sociology
Title: Acute and one-year outcome of a randomised controlled trial of brief cognitive therapy for major depressive disorder in primary care
Abstract: Background The consensus statement on the treatment of depression (Paykel & Priest, 1992) advocates the use of cognitive therapy techniques as an adjunct to medication. Method This paper describes a randomised controlled trial of brief cognitive therapy (BCT) plus ‘treatment as usual’ versus treatment as usual in the management of 48 patients with major depressive disorder presenting in primary care. Results At the end of the acute phase, significantly more subjects (P < 0.05) met recovery criteria in the intervention group (n=15) compared with the control group (n=8). When initial neuroticism scores were controlled for, reductions in Beck Depression Inventory and Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression scores favoured the BCT group throughout the 12 months of follow-up. Conclusions BCT may be beneficial, but given the time constraints, therapists need to be more rather than less skilled in cognitive therapy. This, plus methodological limitations, leads us to advise caution before applying this approach more widely in primary care.
Extracted statement — Setting: Primary care
Research field: Sociology
Title: Telephone psychotherapy and telephone care management for primary care patients starting antidepressant treatment: a randomized controlled trial
Abstract: CONTEXT Both antidepressant medication and structured psychotherapy have been proven efficacious, but less than one third of people with depressive disorders receive effective levels of either treatment. OBJECTIVE To compare usual primary care for depression with 2 intervention programs: telephone care management and telephone care management plus telephone psychotherapy. DESIGN Three-group randomized controlled trial with allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessment conducted between November 2000 and May 2002. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS A total of 600 patients beginning antidepressant treatment for depression were systematically sampled from 7 group-model primary care clinics; patients already receiving psychotherapy were excluded. INTERVENTIONS Usual primary care; usual care plus a telephone care management program including at least 3 outreach calls, feedback to the treating physician, and care coordination; usual care plus care management integrated with a structured 8-session cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy program delivered by telephone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Blinded telephone interviews at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months assessed depression severity (Hopkins Symptom Checklist Depression Scale and the Patient Health Questionnaire), patient-rated improvement, and satisfaction with treatment. Computerized administrative data examined use of antidepressant medication and outpatient visits. RESULTS Treatment participation rates were 97% for telephone care management and 93% for telephone care management plus psychotherapy. Compared with usual care, the telephone psychotherapy intervention led to lower mean Hopkins Symptom Checklist Depression Scale depression scores (P =.02), a higher proportion of patients reporting that depression was "much improved" (80% vs 55%, P<.001), and a higher proportion of patients "very satisfied" with depression treatment (59% vs 29%, P<.001). The telephone care management program had smaller effects on patient-rated improvement (66% vs 55%, P =.04) and satisfaction (47% vs 29%, P =.001); effects on mean depression scores were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS For primary care patients beginning antidepressant treatment, a telephone program integrating care management and structured cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy can significantly improve satisfaction and clinical outcomes. These findings suggest a new public health model of psychotherapy for depression including active outreach and vigorous efforts to improve access to and motivation for treatment.
Extracted statement — Setting: Primary care
Research field: Sociology
Title: Treatment of dysthymia and minor depression in primary care: A randomized controlled trial in older adults
Abstract: CONTEXT Insufficient evidence exists for recommendation of specific effective treatments for older primary care patients with minor depression or dysthymia. OBJECTIVE To compare the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy in primary care settings among older persons with minor depression or dysthymia. DESIGN Randomized, placebo-controlled trial (November 1995-August 1998). SETTING Four geographically and clinically diverse primary care practices. PARTICIPANTS A total of 415 primary care patients (mean age, 71 years) with minor depression (n = 204) or dysthymia (n = 211) and a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score of at least 10 were randomized; 311 (74.9%) completed all study visits. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomly assigned to receive paroxetine (n = 137) or placebo (n = 140), starting at 10 mg/d and titrated to a maximum of 40 mg/d, or problem-solving treatment-primary care (PST-PC; n = 138). For the paroxetine and placebo groups, the 6 visits over 11 weeks included general support and symptom and adverse effects monitoring; for the PST-PC group, visits were for psychotherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Depressive symptoms, by the 20-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist Depression Scale (HSCL-D-20) and the HDRS; and functional status, by the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 (SF-36) physical and mental components. RESULTS Paroxetine patients showed greater (difference in mean [SE] 11-week change in HSCL-D-20 scores, 0.21 [0. 07]; P =.004) symptom resolution than placebo patients. Patients treated with PST-PC did not show more improvement than placebo (difference in mean [SE] change in HSCL-D-20 scores, 0.11 [0.13]; P =.13), but their symptoms improved more rapidly than those of placebo patients during the latter treatment weeks (P =.01). For dysthymia, paroxetine improved mental health functioning vs placebo among patients whose baseline functioning was high (difference in mean [SE] change in SF-36 mental component scores, 5.8 [2.02]; P =. 01) or intermediate (difference in mean [SE] change in SF-36 mental component scores, 4.4 [1.74]; P =.03). Mental health functioning in dysthymia patients was not significantly improved by PST-PC compared with placebo (P>/=.12 for low-, intermediate-, and high-functioning groups). For minor depression, both paroxetine and PST-PC improved mental health functioning in patients in the lowest tertile of baseline functioning (difference vs placebo in mean [SE] change in SF-36 mental component scores, 4.7 [2.03] for those taking paroxetine; 4.7 [1.96] for the PST-PC treatment; P =.02 vs placebo). CONCLUSIONS Paroxetine showed moderate benefit for depressive symptoms and mental health function in elderly patients with dysthymia and more severely impaired elderly patients with minor depression. The benefits of PST-PC were smaller, had slower onset, and were more subject to site differences than those of paroxetine.
Extracted statement — Setting: Primary care