监督中临床推理的可扩展检测:机器学习可行性研究。

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Psychotherapy Pub Date : 2026-09-21 DOI:10.1037/pst0000638
Kimberly D Becker, Ben Webster, Austin Seymour, Bruce F Chorpita
{"title":"监督中临床推理的可扩展检测:机器学习可行性研究。","authors":"Kimberly D Becker, Ben Webster, Austin Seymour, Bruce F Chorpita","doi":"10.1037/pst0000638","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Clinical reasoning shapes every clinical decision but remains largely invisible in therapy. Supervision, where supervisors and therapists deliberate together through dialogue, is a natural context for studying clinical reasoning, yet such reasoning is difficult to measure at scale. This study examined whether machine learning could detect clinical reasoning in supervision transcripts. We analyzed 631 supervision transcripts from the Reaching Families trial, in which supervisor-therapist dyads discussed youth cases with treatment engagement challenges, coded by human raters across three categories: reasoning activities (e.g., considering, selecting, monitoring), content focus (problems or practices), and referent (youth or caregiver). We first compared a bag-of-words model (Complement Naïve Bayes) and a transformer-based model (DistilBERT) to assess signal detectability. We then examined whether DistilBERT's performance varied by condition: a coordinated knowledge systems intervention, which structures supervisory dialogue around a specific reasoning cycle, versus a practice guidelines control, and benchmarked DistilBERT's agreement against human coders. DistilBERT outperformed Complement Naïve Bayes across all metrics, achieving moderate to substantial agreement with human ratings across code categories (κ > 0.58), though McNemar's tests indicated systematic underlabeling. Agreement was stronger for coordinated knowledge systems than practice guidelines transcripts. These findings support the feasibility of using machine learning to detect clinical reasoning in supervision transcripts, an early step toward scalable labeling methods that capture what reasoning was about and how it unfolded. With continued development, this approach could advance understanding of how supervisory reasoning relates to clinical practice and support data-informed feedback for supervisors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20910,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toward scalable detection of clinical reasoning in supervision: A machine learning feasibility study.\",\"authors\":\"Kimberly D Becker, Ben Webster, Austin Seymour, Bruce F Chorpita\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/pst0000638\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Clinical reasoning shapes every clinical decision but remains largely invisible in therapy. Supervision, where supervisors and therapists deliberate together through dialogue, is a natural context for studying clinical reasoning, yet such reasoning is difficult to measure at scale. This study examined whether machine learning could detect clinical reasoning in supervision transcripts. We analyzed 631 supervision transcripts from the Reaching Families trial, in which supervisor-therapist dyads discussed youth cases with treatment engagement challenges, coded by human raters across three categories: reasoning activities (e.g., considering, selecting, monitoring), content focus (problems or practices), and referent (youth or caregiver). We first compared a bag-of-words model (Complement Naïve Bayes) and a transformer-based model (DistilBERT) to assess signal detectability. We then examined whether DistilBERT's performance varied by condition: a coordinated knowledge systems intervention, which structures supervisory dialogue around a specific reasoning cycle, versus a practice guidelines control, and benchmarked DistilBERT's agreement against human coders. DistilBERT outperformed Complement Naïve Bayes across all metrics, achieving moderate to substantial agreement with human ratings across code categories (κ > 0.58), though McNemar's tests indicated systematic underlabeling. Agreement was stronger for coordinated knowledge systems than practice guidelines transcripts. These findings support the feasibility of using machine learning to detect clinical reasoning in supervision transcripts, an early step toward scalable labeling methods that capture what reasoning was about and how it unfolded. With continued development, this approach could advance understanding of how supervisory reasoning relates to clinical practice and support data-informed feedback for supervisors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20910,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychotherapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000638\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000638","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

临床推理影响着每一个临床决策,但在治疗中基本上是不可见的。监督,即管理者和治疗师通过对话共同商议,是研究临床推理的自然环境,然而这种推理很难在规模上衡量。本研究考察了机器学习是否可以检测到监管记录中的临床推理。我们分析了来自“接触家庭”试验的631份监督记录,在这些记录中,监督-治疗师二人组讨论了具有治疗参与挑战的青少年案例,由人类评分员分为三类进行编码:推理活动(例如,考虑,选择,监控),内容焦点(问题或实践)和参考(青少年或照顾者)。我们首先比较了词袋模型(Complement Naïve Bayes)和基于变压器的模型(DistilBERT)来评估信号的可检测性。然后,我们检查了蒸馏器的性能是否随条件而变化:协调的知识系统干预,围绕特定的推理周期构建监督对话,与实践指南控制,并将蒸馏器的协议与人类编码人员进行基准测试。尽管McNemar的测试表明系统标记不足,但在所有指标上,DistilBERT的表现都优于Complement Naïve贝叶斯,在代码类别(κ > 0.58)上与人类评分达到中度到实质性的一致。对于协调的知识系统,一致性比实践指南文本更强。这些发现支持了使用机器学习来检测监督记录中的临床推理的可行性,这是迈向可扩展标记方法的第一步,该方法可以捕获推理的内容及其展开方式。随着不断的发展,这种方法可以促进对监督推理如何与临床实践相关的理解,并支持对主管的数据知情反馈。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2026 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Toward scalable detection of clinical reasoning in supervision: A machine learning feasibility study.

Clinical reasoning shapes every clinical decision but remains largely invisible in therapy. Supervision, where supervisors and therapists deliberate together through dialogue, is a natural context for studying clinical reasoning, yet such reasoning is difficult to measure at scale. This study examined whether machine learning could detect clinical reasoning in supervision transcripts. We analyzed 631 supervision transcripts from the Reaching Families trial, in which supervisor-therapist dyads discussed youth cases with treatment engagement challenges, coded by human raters across three categories: reasoning activities (e.g., considering, selecting, monitoring), content focus (problems or practices), and referent (youth or caregiver). We first compared a bag-of-words model (Complement Naïve Bayes) and a transformer-based model (DistilBERT) to assess signal detectability. We then examined whether DistilBERT's performance varied by condition: a coordinated knowledge systems intervention, which structures supervisory dialogue around a specific reasoning cycle, versus a practice guidelines control, and benchmarked DistilBERT's agreement against human coders. DistilBERT outperformed Complement Naïve Bayes across all metrics, achieving moderate to substantial agreement with human ratings across code categories (κ > 0.58), though McNemar's tests indicated systematic underlabeling. Agreement was stronger for coordinated knowledge systems than practice guidelines transcripts. These findings support the feasibility of using machine learning to detect clinical reasoning in supervision transcripts, an early step toward scalable labeling methods that capture what reasoning was about and how it unfolded. With continued development, this approach could advance understanding of how supervisory reasoning relates to clinical practice and support data-informed feedback for supervisors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychotherapy
Psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.00%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice, Training publishes a wide variety of articles relevant to the field of psychotherapy. The journal strives to foster interactions among individuals involved with training, practice theory, and research since all areas are essential to psychotherapy. This journal is an invaluable resource for practicing clinical and counseling psychologists, social workers, and mental health professionals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书