Objective Impulsivity is associated with eating pathology, but different dimensions of impulsivity have not been extensively studied in the eating disorders. The current study examined the relationship between four facets of impulsivity and eating disorder recovery status. Method Females formerly seen for an eating disorder were categorized as having an eating disorder (n=53), partially recovered (n=15), or fully recovered (n=20) based on a diagnostic interview and physical, behavioral, and psychological indices. These groups and non-eating disorder controls were compared on impulsivity facets from the UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale (UPPS): Urgency (negative urgency), Premeditation (lack of), Perseverance (lack of), and Sensation Seeking. Results Negative urgency (the tendency to engage in impulsive behavior to alleviate negative affect) was related to recovery. The fully recovered group and controls experienced significantly less negative urgency than those with a current eating disorder; the partially recovered group did not differ from the eating disorder group. Discussion Findings suggest that negative urgency may be a particularly important facet of impulsivity to target in therapeutic intervention for eating disorders, especially among those with a history of binge eating and/or purging. Future longitudinal work is needed to test a potential causal relationship between negative urgency and eating disorder recovery.

ObjectiveEating disorder recovery research has emphasized the absence of symptoms over the presence of adaptive aspects like positive body image and healthy eating attitudes. The current study examined how body appreciation and intuitive eating related to eating disorder recovery using a comprehensive recovery definition (physical, behavioral, and cognitive recovery).MethodData were collected from 66 women with an eating disorder history and 31 controls with no history of eating pathology. Participants completed an online survey followed by a phone interview.ResultsThe fully recovered group did not differ from controls on body appreciation, with both groups endorsing significantly higher levels of body appreciation than the partially recovered and current eating disorder groups. Similarly, the fully recovered group did not differ from controls on overall intuitive eating, with both groups endorsing significantly higher levels of overall intuitive eating than the partially recovered and current eating disorder groups.DiscussionPositive psychological constructs such as body appreciation and intuitive eating relate to eating disorder recovery status. Understanding recovery within a strengths‐based framework may inform intervention and relapse prevention.

Objective We aimed to replicate the concurrent validity of a comprehensive definition of eating disorder recovery (physical, behavioral, and cognitive indices) in a sample followed up 7–8 years from baseline, and to examine, for the first time with this comprehensive definition, predictive validity. Method Participants were 66 women with a history of an eating disorder and 31 age‐matched controls who completed an online survey and phone interview. Results In general, women who were fully recovered were statistically indistinguishable from controls and had significantly less eating disorder attitudes and behaviors than the partially recovered and eating disorder groups. Being fully recovered at baseline was a robust predictor of stability: of those fully recovered at baseline, 80% remained fully recovered at follow‐up. One‐third of those with an eating disorder and one‐half of those in partial recovery at baseline attained full recovery at follow‐up. Discussion These findings support the current operationalization of eating disorder recovery, encompassing physical, behavioral, and cognitive indices, as valid and highlight that full recovery is not only possible but predicts full recovery years later. Future research should examine this operationalization in diverse samples and study trajectories of recovery to identify predictors.

Despite psychomotor restlessness and akathisia being an occasionally reported side effect of antidepressants as a class, and mirtazapine specifically, there is no general consensus on the best treatment approach. Propranolol may prove to be an effective treatment approach in patients who are not candidates for alternative therapies.

Disentangling cause and effect in the relationship between cannabis and psychosis: are we there yet?The debate over the role of cannabis in promoting psychosis is an important one because it concerns a potential risk factor that could be specifically targeted in early treatment interventions. It is therefore with great interest that we read the recent article by Kraan et al. (2016) in Psychological Medicine reporting the results of a meta-analysis on the association between cannabis use and transition to psychosis in individuals at ultrahigh risk. Aggregating data from seven studies that collectively included >1000 subjects, the authors report that overall lifetime cannabis use was not related to transition to psychosis. Subsequently, Kraan et al.(2016) performed a second meta-analysis on a subset of five of the initial seven studies and concluded that current cannabis abuse or dependence predicted psychosis.After perusing the five studies used in the second meta-analysis, we are left with several methodical questions. The authors' main focus is on elucidating the impact of a current diagnosis of cannabis abuse and dependence on the transition to psychosis. However, at least based on the available published material, the time-frame of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV) abuse and dependence in relation to transition to psychosis is sufficiently specified in only two of the pertinent five studies (Phillips et al. 2002;Buchy et al. 2014). It should also be noted that the two studies by Auther et al. (2012Auther et al. ( , 2015 contain overlapping samples and that Valmaggia et al. (2014) do not provide a DSM-IV diagnosis of dependence in their report.The authors interpret their results as evidence for a dose-response relationship between cannabis use and transition to psychosis because current cannabis dependence rather than lifetime cannabis use was associated with transition. However, an alternative explanation of this finding could be that higher transition rates reflect the cumulative result of problem behaviours generally associated with drug addiction. Impairments linked with drug addiction may include reduced problem solving, lack of social support and failure to fulfill major role obligations, all of which are all likely to be important risk factors for the transition to psychosis (e.g. Collip et al. 2013). Importantly, the amount of substance consumption -and thereby the amount of exposure to the toxic agent -is itself not a criterion for a DSM-IV diagnosis of abuse or dependence. We would also like to note that important confounding factors such as use of other drugs (e.g. Power et al. 2013;Giordano et al. 2015) were not sufficiently taken into account by the authors. Unfortunately, even the confounder alcohol (Auther et al. 2015) was not included in the analysis, although five of the studies used in the analysis report having recorded data on alcohol use.Taken together, the relationship between cannabis use and psychosis remains complex and in need of further...