MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057918818 · doi:10.1097/nmd.0b013e3181ef34b2

Attachment Insecurity Predicts Eating Disorder Symptoms and Treatment Outcomes in a Clinical Sample of Women

2010· article· en· W2057918818 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBulimia nervosaAnorexia nervosaAnxietyClinical psychologyEating disordersPsychologyBinge eatingAttachment theoryPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the extent to which attachment insecurity was related to eating disorder (ED) symptoms, and predictive of treatment outcomes. Women diagnosed with anorexia nervosa (AN) restricting subtype (ANR), AN binge purge subtype (ANB), or bulimia nervosa (BN) completed an attachment scale pretreatment, and ED symptom scales pretreatment (N = 243) and post-treatment (N = 157). A comparison sample of 126 non-ED women completed attachment scales on 1 occasion. Those with EDs had significantly higher attachment insecurity than non-ED. ANB was associated with higher attachment avoidance compared with ANR and BN, and higher attachment anxiety compared with BN. Higher attachment anxiety was significantly related to greater ED symptom severity and poorer treatment outcome across all EDs even after controlling for ED diagnosis. Attachment dimensions substantially contribute to our understanding of ED symptoms and treatment outcome. Addressing attachment insecurity when treating those with EDs may improve treatment outcomes.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.334 · 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