MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009568630 · doi:10.1080/10640261003719443

Family-Based Treatment for Adolescents With Anorexia Nervosa: A Dissemination Study

2010· article· en· W2009568630 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Couturier, Leanna Isserlin, James Lock

Bibliographic record

VenueEating Disorders · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcMaster Children's Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsAnorexia nervosaPsychologyFidelityAmenorrheaMaturity (psychological)AnorexiaClinical psychologyFamily therapyPsychiatryMedicineEating disordersDevelopmental psychologyPregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This open trial of Family-Based Treatment for Anorexia Nervosa was completed in order to assess the dissemination of this treatment, including effectiveness, fidelity, and acceptability. Fourteen adolescents with Anorexia Nervosa were recruited with mean age 14.0+1.5 years (range 12-17 years). Therapists were trained using a workshop, manual and weekly supervision. Sessions were videotaped and rated for treatment fidelity. Pre- and post- treatment assessments were compared. Weight was significantly increased by an average of 7.8 kg. Dietary restraint showed significant improvement, as did interoceptive deficits and maturity fears. Of the 9 participants who had secondary amenorrhea at baseline, 8 had regained menstrual function. Treatment fidelity was rated as at least considerable 72% of the time in phase I of the treatment. Adolescents and parents found the treatment to be acceptable. This preliminary investigation of the dissemination of Family-Based Treatment for adolescents with Anorexia Nervosa indicates that this treatment is effective not only for weight restoration, but also in improving some psychological symptoms including dietary restraint, interoceptive deficits, and maturity fears. In addition, this treatment was adopted with considerable fidelity and was acceptable to adolescents and parents.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations91
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEating DisordersSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207