Cited by 29Eating Disorders and BehaviorsNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Cognitive–behavioral therapy for eating disorders in primary care settings: does it work, and does a greater dose make it more effective?

Rose, Charlotte, Waller, Glenn·2017·International Journal of Eating Disorders

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for eating disorders can be effective in a routine, primary care clinical setting, and to assess dose response. METHOD: The participants were 47 patients who commenced treatment with a publicly-funded primary care eating disorder service. They attended 7-33 sessions of individual CBT (mean = 17), using an evidence-based approach. Routine measures were collected pre- and post-therapy. RESULTS: Three-quarters of the patients completed treatment. Using intention to treat analysis (multiple imputation), the patients showed substantial improvements in eating attitudes, bulimic behaviors, and depression. However, there was no association between the level of improvement and the length of therapy past the 8th to 12th session. DISCUSSION: The level of effectiveness shown here is comparable to that previously demonstrated by more specialist services in secondary and tertiary care. The nonlinear association between number of sessions and recovery highlights the importance of early change, across the eating disorders.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/eat.22778

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rose, C., & Waller, G.
Affiliations
  • AWP, First Step Primary Care Eating Disorder Service Bristol United Kingdom
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
Corresponding author
Waller, Glenn
Venue
International Journal of Eating Disorders
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-09-07
Volume
50
Issue
12
Pages
1350-1355
ISSN
  • 0276-3478 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-108X
OpenAlex
W2752956817
Cited by
29
References
18
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 10 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2
FWCI
2.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Eating Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, eating disorders, primary care, dose-response relationship, treatment duration, bulimic behavior, eating attitudes, depression, treatment effectiveness, early changes
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Feeding and Eating Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Primary Health Care, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review