Treatment Outcome for Adults in a Residential Program for Binge Eating Spectrum Disorders: Protocol for a Prospective Pragmatic Single-Arm Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most studies reporting treatment outcomes for eating disorders at higher levels of care focus on anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. No studies have been published with a singular focus on examining treatment outcomes for adults receiving residential programming specifically designed for the treatment of binge eating spectrum disorders (BESD), including binge eating disorder and bulimia nervosa. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to outline the protocol of a prospective study examining treatment outcomes at discharge and 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month postdischarge follow-up, for a sample of consecutive admissions to a residential program specifically for patients with BESD. METHODS: One hundred consecutive admissions to a binge eating treatment program were enrolled in the prospective single-arm trial between January 2019 and February 2020. Data were collected at admission, discharge, and 3, 6, and 12 months postdischarge, with admission, discharge, and 12-month follow-up as the major timepoints of interest. Results across the major timepoints will be analyzed with mixed effects general linear models. RESULTS: The primary aim is to assess the impact of the program on eating disordered behaviors at discharge and 12-month follow-up, which are hypothesized to improve as a result of treatment. Secondary hypotheses include improvements on comorbid symptoms, including trauma, depression, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms, as well as improvements on medical indicators of health, including cholesterol and triglycerides, at discharge and 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study may aid in the development of treatment guidelines for patients with BESD at higher levels of care and lend support to having specialty treatment programs for patients with BESD. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/32270.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.057 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.013 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".