Outcome of Dialectical Behaviour Therapy for Concurrent Eating and Substance Use Disorders
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
AIM: The current study examined the preliminary efficacy of dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) adapted for concurrent eating disorders (EDs) and substance use disorders (SUDs). METHOD: A matched randomized controlled trial was carried out with 25 female outpatients diagnosed with concurrent ED and SUD. Participants randomized to the intervention condition received DBT, whereas those randomized to the control condition received treatment as usual (TAU), both for a period of 1 year. A series of measures related to disordered eating, substance use and depression were administered to the participants at the beginning of treatment and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months into treatment, followed by 3-month and 6-month follow-up assessments. FINDINGS: Participants randomized to the DBT condition evidenced a superior retention rate relative to their counterparts in the TAU condition at various study time points, including post-treatment (80% versus 20%) and follow-up (60% versus 20%). Due to the unexpected elevated dropout rates and the worsening of ED-SUD symptomatology in the TAU condition, recruitment efforts were terminated early. Results from the DBT condition revealed that the intervention had a significant positive effect on behavioural and attitudinal features of disordered eating, substance use severity and use, negative mood regulation and depressive symptoms. Finally, increases in participants' perceived ability to regulate and cope with negative emotional states were significantly associated with decreases in emotional eating and increases in levels of confidence in ability to resist urges for substance use. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that the adapted DBT might hold promise for treating individuals with concurrent ED and SUD. KEY PRACTITIONER MESSAGE: The current study is the first study to report positive effects of DBT on individuals with concurrent eating and substance use disorders. Although the results require replication and extension, they suggest that the DBT may be promising for this population. The results suggest that clinicians treating individuals with concurrent eating and substance use problems should be particularly cautious of poor treatment retention and treatment complications. The results bear upon the highly salient and important issue of whether individuals with concurrent substance use need to be excluded from research studies and treatment programmes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».