Psychological meanings of eating disorders and their association with symptoms, motivation toward treatment, and clinical evolution among outpatients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unlike patients suffering from egodystonic disorders, people with eating disorders sometimes attribute positive meanings to their symptoms, and this attribution process contributes to the maintenance of the disorder. This study aims at exploring psychological meanings of eating disorders and their associations with symptoms, motivation toward treatment, and clinical evolution. Eighty-one adults with an eating disorder (anorexia nervosa, n = 46 and bulimia nervosa, n = 35) treated in a day-hospital program were asked, each week over an 8-week period, to identify the psychological meanings they ascribed to their eating disorder. Avoidance was the most frequently identified meaning, followed by mental strength, security, death, confidence, identity, care, and communication. Avoidance was more frequently mentioned by participants with bulimia than in cases of anorexia. Security and mental strength were associated with less motivation toward treatment. Death was associated with more depressive and anxious symptoms. An exploratory factor analysis showed that these meanings formed three main dimensions: Avoidance, Intrapsychic, and Relational. Findings suggest that psychological meanings associated with eating disorders can be assessed and used as a clinical tool to increase treatment acceptability and effectiveness.
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".