Investigating treatment mediators when simple random assignment to a control group is not possible.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Quantifying the association between psychotherapy content and clinical outcomes using deep learning
Ewbank, M. P., Cummins, R., Tablan, V., Bateup, S., Catarino, A., Martin, A. J., & Blackwell, A. D. (2020) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.2664 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
- Authors
- Doss
- Venue
- Clinical Psychology Science and Practice
- Published
- 2006-12
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 4
- ISSN
- 0969-5893 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2850
- OpenAlex
- W4229504499
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2019: 1
- Type
- paratext
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical Psychology Science and Practice (publishedVersion)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
