MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200608687 · doi:10.1097/cxa.0000000000000129

Identifying and Managing Eating Disorders in Persons Presenting for Addiction Treatment

2021· article· en· W4200608687 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Trenna Norris, Parker Dahl, Monique Jericho, David Crockford

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Addiction · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEating disordersAddictionBulimia nervosaMindfulnessComorbidityPsychiatryAnorexia nervosaMedicineAddiction medicineSubstance abuseMEDLINEClinical trialClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives: Eating disorders (ED) are common in substance use disorders (SUD), yet often go unrecognized when presenting for addiction treatment. Unrecognized ED can potentially worsen treatment outcomes for both SUD and ED. Means to screen, diagnose, and manage ED when a person presents for addiction treatment are reviewed. Methods: Systematic searches using MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and PubMed augmented by references of found articles were completed using the search terms: eating disorder, anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, alcohol, drugs, substance-related disorders, comorbidity, screening, diagnosis, management and treatment. Screening instruments and treatment options applicable to ED or SUD were reviewed for their applicability to persons with comorbid ED and SUD. Results: The SCOFF, Eating Attitudes Test-26 item version and Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire are means to screen for ED in persons with SUD. There were no screening instruments designed for both ED and SUD nor were there any pharmacologic treatment trials for comorbid ED and SUD. Psychotherapy trials of DBT and mindfulness incorporated into CBT for comorbid ED and SUD are supportive. Data from studies of ED or SUD alone suggest potential roles for specific medications and other psychotherapies for comorbid ED and SUD. Conclusions: ED often go undetected when a person enters addiction treatment, potentially worsening treatment outcomes. Standardized screening for ED is recommended for all persons, particularly women, entering addiction treatment followed by monitoring of ED behaviors during recovery. Pharmacotherapy currently is only adjunctive, whereas DBT or mindfulness incorporated into CBT have best evidence for comorbid ED and SUD. Objectifs: Les troubles de l’alimentation (TA) sont courants dans les troubles liés à l’utilisation de substances (TUS), mais passent souvent inaperçus lorsqu’ils se présentent pour un traitement de la dépendance. Un TA non reconnu peut potentiellement aggraver les résultats du traitement pour le TUS et le TA. Les moyens de dépister, de diagnostiquer et de gérer la dysfonction érectile lorsqu’une personne se présente pour un traitement de l’addiction sont examinés. Méthodes: Des recherches systématiques utilisant MEDLINE, Google Scholar et PubMed complétées par des références d’articles trouvés ont été complétées en utilisant les termes de recherche: trouble de l’alimentation, anorexie mentale, boulimie nerveuse, alcool, drogues, troubles liés à la substance, comorbidité, dépistage, diagnostic, gestion et traitement. Les instruments de dépistage et les options de traitement applicables aux TA ou TUS ont été examinés pour leur applicabilité aux personnes présentant des comorbidités de TA et TUS. Résultats: Le SCOFF, Eating Attitudes Test-26 item version (EAT-26) et Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) sont des moyens de dépister la dysfonction érectile chez les personnes atteintes de TUS. Il n’y avait aucun instrument de dépistage conçu à la fois pour les TA et TUS, ni d’essais de traitement pharmacologique pour les TA et TUS comorbides. Les essais de psychothérapie sur la DBT et la pleine conscience incorporés dans la CBT pour les comorbidités des TA et TUS sont favorables. Les données d’études sur les TA ou TUS seuls suggèrent des rôles potentiels pour des médicaments spécifiques et d’autres psychothérapies pour les comorbidités des TA et TUS. Conclusions: La dysfonction érectile passe souvent inaperçue lorsqu’une personne entame un traitement contre l’addiction, ce qui peut aggraver les résultats du traitement. Un dépistage standardisé de la dysfonction érectile est recommandé pour toutes les personnes, en particulier les femmes, entrant dans un traitement d’addiction suivi d’une surveillance des comportements du TA pendant la récupération. La pharmacothérapie n’est actuellement qu’un complément, alors que la DBT ou la pleine conscience incorporée à la CBT ont les meilleures preuves de comorbidité des TA et TUS.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of AddictionSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207