Web-Based Therapist-Guided Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Body Dysmorphic Disorder: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and stand-alone mindfulness meditation interventions are gaining empirical support for a wide variety of mental health conditions. In this study, we test the efficacy of web-based therapist-guided mindfulness-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT-M) for body dysmorphic disorder (BDD), a psychiatric disorder characterized by preoccupations with perceived defects in appearance. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether CBT-M for BDD delivered on the web is feasible and acceptable and whether mindfulness meditation adds to CBT treatment effects for BDD. METHODS: In this 8-week, 2-arm, parallel pilot randomized controlled trial, n=28 adults (aged between 18 and 55 years) were randomly allocated to an experimental group (web-based therapist-guided CBT-M) or a control group (web-based therapist-guided CBT). Study retention, accrual, and intervention adherence were assessed, along with self-report measures for BDD, depression, anxiety, and pain intensity taken at baseline and postintervention. RESULTS: This study was feasible to implement and deemed acceptable by participants. After 8 weeks, significant improvements were found on all outcome measures for both treatment groups, and large between-group effect sizes favoring CBT-M were found for BDD symptom severity (d=-0.96), depression (d=-1.06), pain severity (d=-1.12), and pain interference (d=-1.28). However, linear mixed models demonstrated no significant differences between the groups over 8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that mindfulness meditation may add to beneficial web-based CBT treatment effects for BDD. An adequately powered randomized control trial of web-based CBT-M is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05402475, http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05402475.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".