Does impulsivity predict outcome in treatment for binge eating disorder? A multimodal investigation
Open accessAbstract
Multiple dimensions of impulsivity (e.g., affect-driven impulsivity, impulsive inhibition - both general and food-specific, and impulsive decision-making) are associated with binge eating pathology cross-sectionally, yet the literature on whether impulsivity predicts treatment outcome is limited. The present pilot study explored impulsivity-related predictors of 20-week outcome in a small open trial (n = 17) of a novel treatment for binge eating disorder. Overall, dimensions of impulsivity related to emotions (i.e., negative urgency) and food cues emerged as predictors of treatment outcomes (i.e., binge eating frequency and global eating pathology as measured by the Eating Disorders Examination), while more general measures of impulsivity were statistically unrelated to global eating pathology or binge frequency. Specifically, those with higher levels of negative urgency at baseline experienced slower and less pronounced benefit from treatment, and those with higher food-specific impulsivity had more severe global eating pathology at baseline that was consistent at post-treatment and follow-up. These preliminary findings suggest that patients high in negative urgency and with poor response inhibition to food cues may benefit from augmentation of existing treatments to achieve optimal outcomes. Future research will benefit from replication with a larger sample, parsing out the role of different dimensions of impulsivity in treatment outcome for eating disorders, and identifying how treatment can be improved to accommodate higher levels of baseline impulsivity.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Existing eating disorder treatments sometimes fail to recognize impulsivity as part of the eating pathology.
“Meanwhile, standard ED treatment is associated with suboptimal results, possibly because existing treatments sometimes fail to recognize impulsivity as part of the eating pathology [232,233].”
From Separating the Signal from the Noise: How Psychiatric Diagnoses Can Help Discern Food Addiction from Dietary Restraint (2020) · cites this paper as [233]
Standard eating disorder treatment is associated with suboptimal results.
“Meanwhile, standard ED treatment is associated with suboptimal results, possibly because existing treatments sometimes fail to recognize impulsivity as part of the eating pathology [232,233].”
From Separating the Signal from the Noise: How Psychiatric Diagnoses Can Help Discern Food Addiction from Dietary Restraint (2020) · cites this paper as [233]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 47 · Cited by 65
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [27]Hayes SC Strosahl KD Wilson KG Acceptance and commitment therapy: The process and practice of mindful change Guilford Press 2011
- Authors
- Manasse, S. M., Espel, H. M., Schumacher, L. M., Kerrigan, S. G., Zhang, F., Forman, E. M., & Juarascio, A. S.
- Affiliations
- Drexel University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Manasse, Stephanie M.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Appetite
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-10
- Volume
- 105
- Pages
- 172-179
- ISSN
- 0195-6663 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4980181
- OpenAlex
- W2398178099
- Cited by
- 65
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 8.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Appetite (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Mental Health (K23MH105680, F31MH108279)
- Innovation Lab (EMF 041013)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
- Keywords
- binge eating disorder, impulsivity, treatment outcome prediction, negative urgency, response inhibition, food cues, impulsive decision-making, binge eating frequency, eating pathology, augmentation therapy
- MeSH terms
- Self-Control, Adult, Combined Modality Therapy, Cues, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Food Preferences, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Prognosis, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychotherapy, Group, Severity of Illness Index, United States, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Young Adult, Binge-Eating Disorder, Self Report, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Delay Discounting
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