MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3103852350 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2020.609675

Exploring Differences in the Role of Hospitalization on Weight Gain Based on Treatment Type From Randomized Clinical Trials for Adolescent Anorexia Nervosa

2020· article· en· W3103852350 on OpenAlexaff
Nandini Datta, Brittany E. Matheson, Daniel Le Grange, Harry Brandt, D. Blake Woodside, Katherine A. Halmi, Denise E. Wilfley, James Lock

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsWeight gainMedicineAnorexia nervosaRandomized controlled trialWeight lossWeight changeClinical trialBody weightPediatricsEating disordersPhysical therapyObesityPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: This study explores the impact of weight gain during medical stabilization hospitalization on weight outcomes between three outpatient treatments for adolescent anorexia nervosa (AN): Adolescent Focused Therapy (AFT), Systemic Family Therapy (SyFT), and Family Based Treatment (FBT). Methods: A secondary analysis of weight gain data (N= 215) of adolescents (12-18 years) meeting DSM-IV criteria for AN (exclusive of amenorrhea criteria) who participated in two randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted. Main outcomes examined were changes in weight restoration (>94% expected body weight or EBW) and differences in weight change attributable to hospital weight gain. Results: Weight gain resulting from hospitalizations did not substantially change weight recovery rates. Hospital weight gain contributed most to overall treatment weight gain in AFT compared to FBT and SyFT. Conclusion: Brief medical stabilization weight gain does not contribute substantially to weight recovery in adolescents with AN who participated in RCTs.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.181
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.243
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1810.243
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.018
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207