Factors associated with improvements in readiness for change: Low vs. normal BMI eating disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine factors associated with improvements in readiness for change as a function of body mass index (BMI) in individuals assessed for eating disorders treatment. METHOD: Participants (n = 128) completed the Readiness and Motivation Interview (RMI) and measures of psychiatric and eating disorder symptoms, quality of life, and self-esteem at baseline and at 5-month follow-up. RESULTS: Participants whose readiness for change showed improvements in psychiatric symptom severity, global self-esteem, and in the importance of friendships as a determinant of self-esteem. Only those with a normal baseline BMI (20 kg/m(2) or greater) improved in eating disorder symptoms and quality of life, and reported increased importance of personal development and decreased importance of shape and weight as determinants of self-esteem. CONCLUSION: Correlates of readiness differed between low and normal BMI participants, suggesting that weight status may be an important variable to consider in preparing highly ambivalent individuals for treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".