Family therapy for emerging adults with anorexia nervosa: Expert opinion on evidence, practice considerations, and future directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various forms of eating disorder focused family therapy (FT-ED) have been developed and evaluated for adolescents. FT-ED for adolescent anorexia nervosa (AN) focuses on empowering parents/carers with the knowledge and skills required to facilitate recovery for their child. The recent trend and increased awareness of the period between adolescence and adulthood during ages 18-25, known as 'emerging adulthood', has brought into question whether the traditional treatment approach for adults with AN, that is, individual therapies, is the most appropriate approach for this age group. This paper briefly outlines the current forms FT-ED for emerging adults with AN and examines the evidence for each. We then present considerations for tailoring FT-ED for emerging adults with AN across three broad domains: structure and set-up, process, and content. Finally, we present suggestions on how to troubleshoot common pitfalls that may be encountered, such as reluctance to include parents in treatment. Future research should examine which forms of FT-ED are best for which emerging adults and families and under what contexts. There is also a need to explore the incorporation of technology into sessions with families who live apart.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".