Case Presentations Combining Family-Based Treatment with the Unified Protocols for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Children and Adolescents for Comorbid Avoidant Restrictive Food Intake Disorder and Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
, which presents with high prevalence rates in community and clinical settings. Given its recent diagnostic recognition, validated and standardized treatments for this population are lacking. In addition, given the complexity, heterogeneity of symptoms, and high rates of psychiatric comorbidities in the ARFID population, new models of care are required. The current therapy model combines two evidence-based treatments - Family Based Treatment (FBT) and the Unified Protocols for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Children and Adolescents (UP-C/A) - for young patients with ARFID plus Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), which allows clinicians to personalize care based on each patient's unique presenting needs. This paper presents two distinct cases which showcase the use of the FBT+UP for ARFID approach for treating comorbid ARFID and ASD in a clinical setting. Case 1 demonstrates the application and reliance on FBT, while Case 2 draws upon UP to facilitate behavioural change in the patient. Case backgrounds, presenting problems, and treatment approaches combining the two evidence-based treatments are presented and discussed. The cases demonstrate the unique challenges of treating young patients with comorbid ARFID and ASD, along with the proposed benefits of the combined approach with this population.
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 | 0.000 | 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".