Day hospitalization programs for eating disorders: A systematic review of the literature
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Partial day hospitalization programs for the treatment of eating disorders are increasingly being developed worldwide. METHOD: First, a systematic database search of day hospitalization programs for eating disorders, published in either English or German, was conducted. Programs that provided sufficient information on their program structure were summarized and compared across various dimensions. Second, the responsible program directors were contacted to provide additional information regarding outcome data, current trends, challenges, and future directions of their programs. Third, outcome data from day programs presented at international conferences were included to expand the base of the review. DISCUSSION: Although the programs from different countries and health care environments varied in terms of their purpose and operated within very different health care systems, many similarities were found to exist, including the use of a multidisciplinary staff and reliance on group treatment as the primary means of therapy. Marked differences were noted in terms of inclusion criteria and intensity of care.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it