Is the transtheoretical model and motivational interviewing approach applicable to the treatment of eating disorders? A review
Abstract
Research in eating disorders is reviewed examining the (1) utility of the Transtheoretical Model in predicting outcome, and (2) efficacy of Motivational Interviewing (MI). There were promising results showing significant relationships between initial stage of change and treatment outcome related to eating pathology (not including purging), body mass index, and some aspects of psychopathology. Of those treatment studies utilising a control group, there was little indication that using MI conferred significant treatment benefit, with the exception of improving motivation and binge eating for people with binge eating disorder and bulimia nervosa. Overall the content of the studies varied greatly with relation to: stage of change and outcome measures, format of MI, diagnostic groupings, age of participants, utilisation of other adjunctive treatments, sample size, presence of follow-up assessments, and study design. Few of the 9 studies examining the efficacy of MI could be considered to have robust methodology. It is recommended that future research using the Transtheoretical Model to predict outcome adopt more uniform methodology so that we can more specifically determine its applicability, and that well-designed treatment studies in eating disorder populations be conducted so that we develop a stronger evidence base from which to decide whether MI confers benefit.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 62 · Cited by 87
- Authors
- Dray, J., & Wade, T. D.
- Affiliations
- Flinders University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Wade, Tracey D.
- ORCID
- Wade, Tracey D.
- Venue
- Clinical Psychology Review
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-08
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 558-565
- ISSN
- 0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2077330388
- Cited by
- 87
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- 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
- eating disorders, transtheoretical model, motivational interviewing, stages of change, treatment outcome prediction, binge eating disorder, bulimia nervosa, motivation, body mass index, psychopathology, treatment efficacy
- MeSH terms
- Feeding and Eating Disorders, Humans, Models, Psychological, Psychotherapy, Research Design, Body Mass Index, Treatment Outcome, Motivational Interviewing
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