Predictors of rapid relapse in bulimia nervosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Relapse remains a significant concern in bulimia nervosa, with some patients relapsing within months of treatment completion. The purpose of the study was to identify predictors of relapse within the first 6 months following treatment. METHOD: The 116 participants were bingeing and/or vomiting ≥ 8 times per month before day hospital (DH), and had ≤ 2 episodes per month in the last month of DH and the first month after DH. Rapid relapse was defined as ≥ 8 episodes per month for 3 months starting within 6 months. RESULTS: The rate of rapid relapse was 27.6%. Patients who relapsed soon after DH had higher frequencies of bingeing and vomiting before treatment, engaged in less body avoidance before treatment and were more likely to be slow responders to treatment. Weight and shape concerns and body checking were not significant predictors. DISCUSSION: More frequent bulimic symptoms accompanied by less body avoidance may indicate an entrenchment in the illness which in turn augurs a labored and transient response to DH treatment that is difficult to sustain after intensive treatment ends.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".