Weight gain in an eating disorders day program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Day treatment programs have increasingly become an important level of care in the medical and psychiatric management of patients with eating disorders, yet there is little in the literature describing the weight gain patterns of patients in these programs. METHODS: Weight gain accomplished by 198 patients admitted to a day program over a 2-year period was studied. Weight gain was analyzed by demographic, diagnostic and program-related variables and was compared for weekdays and weekends. RESULTS: The mean length of stay was 2.6 weeks and patients gained a mean of 2.1 pounds (0.95 kg) in the program. Approximately one-quarter of patients lost weight, one-quarter gained 0 to <2 pounds (0.9 kg), one-quarter gained 2-4 pounds (0.9-1.8 kg), and one-quarter gained more than 4 pounds (1.8 kg). Weight gain was greater in those with a diagnosis of anorexia nervosa or eating disorder not otherwise specified (compared to bulimia nervosa), a longer time in the program, and a lower body mass index on admission. Patients gained more on weekdays, while in the program, than on weekends, when they were home. CONCLUSIONS: The data showed that most patients accomplished modest weight gains during a relatively short stay in an eating disorders day program, demonstrating what can be expected for this level of care in the current healthcare environment.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".