Body Dissatisfaction, Eating Disorders
Conditions
Keywords
eating disorders, body dissatisfaction, risk factors, buffering factors, incidence, efficacy, cost-effectiveness
Brief summary
The goal of thin randomized controlled trial is to investigate the efficacy of a prevention program for reducing the incidence of eating disorders among youth (15-20). We target youth at these ages who experience a subjective sense of body dissatisfaction, and are thus at increased risk of developing an eating disorder. The prevention program is based on improving protective factors such as body appreciation, body image flexibility, intuitive eating, and acceptance. It will be compared to a credible placebo (expressive writing).
Detailed description
Research area and aims: Eating disorders (EDs) are common and cause significant morbidity and mortality. Due to stigma, only 25% seek help and only 50% fully recover after receiving treatments. Large-scale prevention is urgently needed to reduce the emergence and burden of EDs at a population level. However, current prevention programs do not meet requirements for efficient and economically attractive large-scale implementation. The main aim of this project is to investigate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a scalable, brief, and interactive prevention program based on reinforcement of protective factors against EDs using a randomized controlled design. A focus on protective factors disrupts the processes by which risk factors increase the probability for EDs to emerge and minimizes the risks for stigmatization. Research questions: 1. How effective is an internet-based prevention program, that reinforces protective factors against EDs, in reducing the onset of EDs 6, 12, 24, and 36 months post-intervention? 2. Does the intervention reduce the incidence of EDs through enhancement of specifically targeted protective factors (mediators)? 3. Is prevention of EDs based on reinforcement of protective factors cost-effective? 4. How do the participant experience their participation in these two interventions? Other research questions concern gender differences in enrollment and compliance, potential moderators of outcome, participation in booster sessions, and potential risk for stigma.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALEnhancing protective factors
Participants will watch some short movies and infographics, and will be asked to argue for the importance of body image flexibility, body functionality appreciation, etc.
BEHAVIORALExpressive writing
Participants will reflect and write about any cognitions or emotions they can have in relation to their bodies.
Sponsors
Uppsala University
Linkoeping University
Karolinska Institutet
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Masking description
Randomization will be conducted using a randomization list. As soon as a participant is eligible after providing baseline data and a clinical interview, the assessment staff will ask the coordinator to check what condition the participant should be assigned to based on the randomization list. The participants will be informed. At follow-ups, the assessors will not be aware of the intervention condition of each participants.
Intervention model description
This is randomized controlled trials. Participants will be randomized to the active prevention program, or to a placebo (expressive writing). The intervention is brief (four weeks only). Recruitment of the participants (n=644) will take one year (anticipated)After the intervention, they will receive a booster session and will be followed up every 6 months, for 36 months post-intervention.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
15 Years to 20 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
Youth and young people (15-20 years) with a subjective experience of body dissatisfaction.
Exclusion criteria
Indications of depression, or suicidality, as well as presence of an eating disorder, or other conditions that may require medical attention, or conditions that makes it impossible to complete the intervention (e.g., not being able to read and write in Swedish).
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Incidence of eating disorders through the Eating disorders examination (EDE) (Fairburn, 2008, Guilford Press). | Baseline to 36 months post-intervention | The Eating disorders examination interview is the gold standard to establish diagnoses of eating disorders and will be used at baseline and to investigate the incidence of eating disorders (ED) during the follow-up period (36 months post intervention). Diagnostic status will be specified based on specific criteria for each ED diagnosis. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in body appreciation through the Body Appreciation Scale (BAS: Tylka & Wood-Bacalow, 2015, Body Image, 12, 53-67). | From baseline, up to 36 months post-intervention | The Body Appreciation Scale (10 items) has good psychometrics. The items are scored on a scale from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate more body appreciation. |
| Change in intuitive eating through the Intuitive Eating Scale (IES: Tylka & Kroon Van Diest, 2013, J Cons Psychol, 60,137-153). | From baseline, up to 36 months post-intervention | The Intuitive Eating Scale (23 items) is an established measure of intuitive eating. It has good psychometric properties. Items are rated on a scale from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate more intuitive eating. |
| Change in self-compassion through the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS: Raes et al., 2011, Clin Psychol Psychother, 18, 250-255). | From baseline, up to 36 months post-intervention | The Self-Compassion Scale (Brief version: 12 items) has good psychometrics. It provides information on an important protective factor. Items are rated on a scale from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate higher self-compassion. |
| Change in life values through the Bull's-Eye Values Survey (BE-VS: Lundgren et al, 2012, Cogn Behav Pract, 19, 518-526). | From baseline, up to 36 months post-intervention | The Bull's-Eye Values Survey helps to ascertain what ares in life (i.e., personal values) seem important to each participant. It has been adapted by providing the instructions through a brief instructional video instead of lengthy text. The importance of life directions are rated on a scale from 0 to 7. Higher scores indicate more importance. The proximity to life values is rated on a scale from 1 to 7. Higher scores indicate more proximity, where 7 is the bull's eye. |
| Change in body dissatisfaction through the Body Shape questionnaire: BSQ (Welch et al, 2011: Beh Res Ther, 49, 85-91). | From baseline, up to 36 months post-intervention | The Body Shape questionnaire (Brief version: 8 items) measures body dissatisfaction. It has good psychometric properties. Items are scored on a Likert-type scale from 1 (Never) to 6 (Always). Higher scores indicate more body dissatisfaction. |
| Change in drive for muscularity through the Drive for Muscularity Scale (DMS: McCreary& Sasse, 2000, J Am Coll Health, 48, 297-304). | From baseline, up to 36 months post-intervention | The Drive for Muscularity Scale (15 items) measures one of the risk factors for ED. It has good psychometrics. Items are rated on a scale from 1 to 6. Higher scores indicate stronger drive for muscularity. |
| Change in the internalization of thin ideal through the Ideal Body Stereotype Scale-Revised (IBSS-R: Stice et al, 2008, J Consult Clin Pschol, 76, 329-340) | From baseline, up to 36 months post-intervention | The Body Stereotype Scale-Revised (6 items) measures the internalization of the current thinness ideal, which is a risk factors for ED. It has good psychometrics. Items are rated on a scale from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate more internalization of the thin ideal. |
| Change in quality of life through The Brunnsviken Quality of Life Scale (BBQ: Lindner et al, 2016, Cogn Behav Ther, 45, 182-195). | From baseline, up to 36 months post-intervention | The Brunnsviken Quality of Life Scale is a brief instrument (12 items) developed in Sweden with good psychometrics to measure quality of life. The items are rated on a scale from 0 to 4. Higher scores indicate stronger satisfaction with life. |
| Change in body functionality appreciation through the Functionality Appreciation Scale (FAS: Alleva et al, 2017, Body Image, 23, 28-44). | From baseline, up to 36 months post-intervention | The Functionality Appreciation Scale (7 items) has good psychometrics. Items are rated on a scale from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate higher appreciation of body functionality. |
| Change in body image flexibility through the Body Image Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (BI-AAQ-5: Sandoz et al, 2013, J Cont Behav Science, 2, 39-48). | From baseline, up to 36 months post-intervention | The Body Image Acceptance and Action Questionnaire measures body image flexibility (5 items), which is another protective factor. Items are rated on a scale from 1 to 7. Higher scores indicate more body image flexibility. |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Experience of stigma and iatrogenic effects through the Self-reported risk of stigma and iatrogenic effect. | 6-months post-intervention | Any experience of stigma or iatrogenic effects related to the intervention/study will be investigated through specifically designed questions for the study. |
| Moderators of outcomes: Sex, Age, Socio-economic status. | Baseline assessment | Data on sex (Male or Female), age (15-20) and socioeconomic status (level of education) will be used to investigate whether they moderated the rate of enrollment, compliance (how many modules of the program they complete), and outcome. |
| Experience of stigma and iatrogenic effects through the Self-reported risk of stigma and iatrogenic effect | Post-intervention (i.e., 5 weeks after the start of intervention) | Any experience of stigma or iatrogenic effects related to the intervention/study will be investigated through specifically designed questions for the study |
Countries
Sweden
Contacts
Primary ContactAta Ghaderi, PhD
Backup ContactThomas Parling, PhD
Outcome results
None listed