MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4231290560 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14662164.v1

Relapse prevention for eating disorders: a randomized controlled trial targeting weight-related self-esteem

2021· preprint· en· W4231290560 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah M Royal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialPsychologyProtocol (science)Clinical psychologyEating disordersRelapse preventionPsychiatryMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A high level of weight-related self-esteem (WRSE) at the end of eating disorder treatment is predictive of relapse. The first goal of this project was to develop a cognitive-behavioural intervention to target WRSE in partially remitted eating disorder clients to prevent relapse (WRSE protocol). The second goal (Study 1) was to conduct a pilot study to assess whether receiving the WRSE protocol leads to improvements in WRSE and related variables. The final goal of this project (Study 2) was to conduct a randomized controlled trial to determine whether the individual-based treatment added to treatment as usual (TAU) provided additional benefits to eating disorder clients, with respect to WRSE, eating disorder symptoms, and relapse. After the treatment manual was developed, 16 clients were recruited and administered the treatment protocol in Study 1. The results indicated that participants had significant improvements in levels of WRSE and related variables following treatment. For Study 2, 47 participants who had achieved behavioural symptom interruption were randomly assigned to either 1) TAU + WRSE protocol or 2) TAU. Results were mainly consistent across Complete Case and Last Observation Carried Forward procedures where participants who received the additional WRSE protocol had greater improvements in WRSE, body checking behaviour, and self-esteem. Groups did not differ with respect to body avoidance, general avoidance, fat talk, and other variables compared to participants who received TAU only. Multiple imputation procedures, which accounted for missing data, indicated no significant differences for all measured variables. Participants who completed the WRSE protocol had significantly greater adherence to their meal plan (i.e., less dietary restriction) compared to participants who only received TAU. Groups did not differ regarding level of binge eating and/or vomiting after the intervention period, and there were no differences in relapse between groups at 3-month follow-up. Overall, the newly developed treatment provided some benefit to eating disorder clients above and beyond TAU. However, the data appear to have been sensitive to attrition. Future research should include further refinement of the treatment protocol and evaluation across a longer follow-up period to assess its impact on relapse rates.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEating Disorders and Behaviors→French-language works237,207→