Eating Disorders
Conditions
Keywords
eating disorder, treatment, anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorder, atypical anorexia nervosa, therapy, other specified feeding and eating disorder
Brief summary
The scientific premise, developed from past work, is that treatment personalized based on idiographic models (termed Network Informed Personalized Treatment; NA-PT) will outperform the current gold-standard treatment (Enhanced Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: CBT-E). The study goals are to (1) develop and test the acceptability, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of a randomization of NA-PT versus CBT-E and (2) to test if network-identified precision targets are the mechanism of change. These goals will ultimately lead to the very first personalized treatment for ED and can be extended to additional psychiatric illnesses. Specific aims are (1) To collect preliminary data on the feasibility and acceptability of the randomization of NA-PT (n=40) for EDs versus CBT-E (n=40), (2) To test the initial clinical efficacy of NA-PT versus CBT-E on clinical outcomes (e.g., ED symptoms, body mass index, quality of life) and (3) To examine if changes in NA-identified, precision targets, as well as in dynamic network structure, are associated with change in clinical outcomes.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALPersonalized Treatment for Eating Disorders
The first three sessions consist of diagnosis and general psychoeducation on EDs and treatment for ED. After mobile-assessment is complete, Session 4 includes psychoeducation on the network-informed model of personalized treatment and 14 sessions (sessions 5-19) are focused on the top three targets (4-5 sessions per target). Session 20 is a termination and conclusion session.
The first three sessions consist of diagnosis and general psychoeducation on EDs and treatment for ED. After mobile-assessment is complete, Session 4 consists of food monitoring, addressing irregular eating, challenging thoughts, making adaptive behavioral changes, and relapse prevention. Session 20 is a termination and conclusion session.
Sponsors
University of Louisville
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Age 18-65 * Meets criteria for DSM-5 defined AN, BN, BED, or OSFED (Atypical AN and Atypical BN) * Not currently receiving psychological treatment focused on ED
Exclusion criteria
* Under 18 * Over 65 * Does not meet criteria for DSM-5 defined AN, BN, BED, or OSFED (Atypical AN and Atypical BN) * High and active Suicidality * Active Mania * Medically Compromised Status including extremely low weight - less than or equal to 75% median BMI for age, sex, and height * Simultaneous psychological treatment focused on ED
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in Clinical Impairment using the Clinical Impairment Assessment | Up to 1-Month Follow-Up | The Clinical Impairment Assessment (CIA), a self report measure, is assessed at multiple time points throughout the duration of the study and is used to examine the severity of psychosocial impairment caused by eating disorders. The scores range from 0 to 64 with higher scores indicating more impairment. |
| Change in Eating Disorder Symptoms using the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire | Up to 1-Month Follow-Up | The Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q), a self report measure, is assessed at multiple time points throughout the duration of the study and is used to examine attitudes and behaviors in individuals with eating disorder symptoms. The scores range from 0-6 with higher scores indicating higher severity of eating disorder symptoms. |
| Change in Quality of Life using the Quality of Life Scale | Up to 1-Month Follow-Up | The Quality of Life Scale (QOLS), a self report measure, is assessed at multiple time points throughout the duration of the study and is used to examine various domains of quality of life. Scores range from 16 to 112 with higher scores indicating better quality of life. |
Countries
United States
Contacts
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORCheri A Levinson, PhD
University of Louisville
Outcome results
None listed