StudentBodies-eating disorders: A randomized controlled trial of a coached online intervention for subclinical eating disorders

Abstract

Objective: Eating disorders and subclinical eating disorders are serious and disabling diseases with high prevalence rates on college campuses. Many symptomatic students are never screened nor formally diagnosed with an eating disorder and do not receive mental health treatment. Method: This pilot study examines the feasibility, acceptability, and short-term efficacy of a 10-week online intervention, StudentBodies-Eating Disorders, designed to reduce eating disorder symptoms, related psychopathology, and weight and shape concerns. A total of 65 participants were randomized to the online intervention or waitlist control. Results: Results indicate that for study completers, the intervention had large effects for reduction of eatingrelated psychopathology (d = 1.5), weight concerns (d = .7), and psychosocial impairment (d = .7). Those who completed it rated the program very acceptable. This pilot study suggests the potential efficacy of StudentBodies-Eating Disorders as a self-help intervention for subclinical eating disorders in a non-clinical setting.

Prevention of eating disorders: A systematic review of randomized, controlled trials

“…CBT was the only intervention evaluated in multiple studies . Two of these evaluated the Student Bodies online program.…”

Addressing critical gaps in the treatment of eating disorders

“…The studies needed now are randomized comparisons with CBTgsh or with full CBT, and there are several ongoing or recently completed efforts with stronger control conditions: (1) an Internet‐based version of group CBT for BN (CBT4BN), in which the group intervention was conducted via a therapeutic chat group, vs. face‐to‐face group CBT (Bulik et al, ), finding that CBT4BN appeared to be efficacious, although with a slower trajectory of recovery compared to face‐to‐face group treatment (Zerwas et al, ); (2) an Internet‐based guided self‐help CBT program for individuals with BED vs. face‐to‐face individual CBT (ongoing) (de Zwaan et al, ); and (3) Student Bodies‐Eating Disorders (SB‐ED), a CBTgsh program, utilizing brief 10–15 min daily sessions, that is offered both via an Internet‐based platform and mobile app, vs. referral to usual care among college women with clinical or subclinical eating disorders, with the exception of AN (ongoing) (Using Technology to Improve Eating Disorders Treatment, ; Wilfley, Agras, & Taylor, ). Previous work has established the SB‐ED's initial efficacy for reducing eating disorder psychopathology, weight concerns, binge eating, and purging (Jacobi, Volker, Trockel, & Taylor, ; Jones et al, ; Saekow et al, ).…”

“…The studies needed now are randomized comparisons with CBTgsh or with full CBT, and there are several ongoing or recently completed efforts with stronger control conditions: (1) an Internet-based version of group CBT for BN (CBT4BN), in which the group intervention was conducted via a therapeutic chat group, vs. face-to-face group CBT (Bulik et al, 2012), finding that CBT4BN appeared to be efficacious, although with a slower trajectory of recovery compared to face-to-face group treatment (Zerwas et al, 2017); (2) Agras, & Taylor, 2013). Previous work has established the SB-ED's initial efficacy for reducing eating disorder psychopathology, weight concerns, binge eating, and purging (Jacobi, Volker, Trockel, & Taylor, 2012;Jones et al, 2008;Saekow et al, 2015).…”

Screening and offering online programs for eating disorders: Reach, pathology, and differences across eating disorder status groups at 28 U.S. universities

“…Internet-based technologies may improve care for EDs on college campuses by overcoming barriers to treatment, offsetting in-person clinical demands, increasing access, and reducing costs (Kumar et al, 2013). Internet technologies are efficacious for screening, prevention, and treatment of EDs, including among college students (e.g., Beintner, Jacobi, & Taylor, 2012;Jones et al, 2014;Melioli et al, 2016;Saekow et al, 2015). However, a key challenge is effectively delivering these promising technologies to populations, including directly linking screening results to prevention and treatment programs.…”