A feasibility study of a 2‐week self‐compassionate letter‐writing intervention for nontreatment seeking individuals with typical and atypical anorexia nervosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Most individuals with anorexia nervosa (AN) do not seek treatment and shame is a common barrier. This study sought to determine whether a brief intervention designed to foster self-compassion would reduce shame and increase treatment motivation among nontreatment seeking individuals with AN. METHOD: Forty nontreatment seeking females with AN (75%) and atypical AN were randomly assigned to 2 weeks of a daily self-compassionate letter-writing intervention or a waitlist control condition. All participants completed pre, mid, and post questionnaires, and were weighed pre and post. RESULTS: The intervention yielded respectable credibility ratings and compliance and retained 95% of participants. Compared to the control condition, it produced greater increases in self-compassion and greater decreases in shame and fears of self-compassion. BMI and readiness to get help for one's eating decreased in the control condition but did not change significantly in the intervention condition, though the motivation for treatment showed a trend toward increasing. Changes in eating pathology and readiness to get help for one's weight did not differ between conditions. DISCUSSION: Self-compassionate letter-writing may be an acceptable and feasible intervention for nontreatment seeking individuals with AN and might reduce certain barriers to help-seeking while improving psychological functioning.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".