Several studies support the efficacy of interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) in the treatment of eating disorders. Treatment outcomes are likely to be augmented through a greater understanding, and hence treatment targeting, of the mechanisms whereby IPT induces therapeutic gains. To this end, the present paper seeks to develop a theoretical model of IPT in the context of eating disorders (IPT-ED). After providing a brief description of IPT, the IPT-ED model is presented and research supporting its theorized mechanisms is summarized. This model proposes that negative social evaluation plays a pivotal role as both a cause (via its detrimental impact on self evaluation and associated affect) and consequence of eating disorder symptoms. In the final section, key eating disorder constructs (namely, the developmental period of adolescence, clinical perfectionism, cognitive dysfunction, and affect regulation) are re-interpreted from the standpoint of negative social evaluation thereby further explicating IPT's efficacy as an intervention for individuals with an eating disorder.

This report examines a possible distortion in the results of comparative treatment studies due to the association of the researcher's treatment allegiances with outcomes of those treatments. In eight past reviews a trend appeared for significant associations between the researcher's allegiance and outcomes of treatments compared. In a new review of 29 studies of treatment comparisons, a similar trend appeared. Allegiance ratings were based not only on the usual reprint method, but also on two new methods: ratings by colleagues who knew the researcher well, and self‐ratings by the researchers themselves. The two new allegiance methods Interco related only moderately, but each allegiance measure correlated significantly with outcomes of the treatments compared, and when combined, the three measures explained 69% of the variance in outcomes Such an association can distort comparative treatment results. Our report concludes with how the researcher's allegiance may become associated with treatment outcomes and how studies should deal with these associations.

Objective: A goal of the DSM-IV revision is to increase clinical and research utility by improving diagnostic validity through reliance on empirical evidence. Currently defined eating disorder (ED) categories have limited validity and require refinement based on data. Method:The available scientific evidence is considered in evaluating the current ED nosology.Results: Specific recommendations include modifying ED classification by retaining categories but adding a dimensional component; removing the amenorrhea criterion for anorexia nervosa (AN); removing the subtypes for AN and bulimia nervosa (BN); making binge eating disorder (BED) an official diagnosis; and unifying the frequency and duration cut-points for BN and BED to once per week for 3 months. Priority research areas should include epidemiologic studies of full-range ED symptomatology and should focus on empirical validation for individual criterion.Conclusion: There are significant issues to address in revising ED nosology as we move toward a more valid and useful DSM-V. V V C 2007 by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The results document the long-term efficacy of out-patient CBT and IPT for binge eating disorder. Further research is warranted to elucidate the time course and mechanisms of change of these treatments for binge eating disorder.

No abstract