Family-Based Treatment for Adolescents With Anorexia Nervosa: A Dissemination Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".