Group‐Based Compassion‐Focused Therapy as an Adjunct to Outpatient Treatment for Eating Disorders: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
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
The current study sought to assess the acceptability and feasibility of a compassion-focused therapy (CFT) group as an adjunct to evidence-based outpatient treatment for eating disorders, and to examine its preliminary efficacy relative to treatment as usual (TAU). Twenty-two outpatients with various types of eating disorders were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of TAU (n = 11) or TAU plus weekly CFT groups adapted for an eating disorder population (CFT + TAU; n = 11). Participants in both conditions completed measures of self-compassion, fears of compassion, shame and eating disorder pathology at baseline, week 4, week 8 and week 12. Additionally, participants receiving the CFT group completed measures assessing acceptability and feasibility of the group. Results indicated that the CFT group demonstrated strong acceptability; attendance was high and the group retained over 80% of participants. Participants rated the group positively and indicated they would be very likely to recommend it to peers with similar symptoms. Intention-to-treat analyses revealed that compared to the TAU condition, the CFT + TAU condition yielded greater improvements in self-compassion, fears of self-compassion, fears of receiving compassion, shame and eating disorder pathology over the 12 weeks. Results suggest that group-based CFT, offered in conjunction with evidence-based outpatient TAU for eating disorders, may be an acceptable, feasible and efficacious intervention. Furthermore, eating disorder patients appear to see benefit in, and observe gains from, working on the CFT goals of overcoming fears of compassion, developing more self-compassion and accessing more compassion from others. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.001 |
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