Assessing the feasibility of an intervention for adolescents and parents transitioning out of paediatric eating disorder services: A mixed methods study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of a new intervention designed to support adolescents and parents in the transition from paediatric eating disorder (ED) treatment to adult mental health services. METHOD: Pre-transition adolescents with EDs, and their parents, were invited to complete up to five transition intervention components over 3 months. A mixed methods design was used to assess intervention feasibility, comprised of acceptability and preliminary effectiveness. A single-arm pre-post design was used to collect and analyse quantitative survey and feasibility data. Individual qualitative interviews and written reflections were collected and analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: This study yielded a 33% (10/31) recruitment rate and 68% (13/19) retention rate. On average, participants completed 75% of the expected components in under 3 months, with varied completion of each expected intervention component (40%-100%). Participants found the intervention convenient and helpful. Parents reported a significant decrease in guilt (Z = -2.02, p = 0.04, d = -0.83). By 1-month post-transition, three adolescents transitioned to interim supports and none started specialist adult treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Although this transition intervention did not demonstrate adequate feasibility, its acceptability and effectiveness should be evaluated after an update based on participant feedback. Other solutions to bridge the transition gap for adolescents with EDs should continue to be identified. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04888273.
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.
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 | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 it