Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 243

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomized Clinical Trial of Family-Based Treatment and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Adolescent Bulimia Nervosa

Open access
Le Grange, Daniel, Lock, James, Agras, W. Stewart, Bryson, Susan W., Jo, Booil·2015·Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective There is a paucity of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for adolescents with bulimia nervosa (BN). Prior studies suggest cognitive-behavioral therapy adapted for adolescents (CBT-A) and family-based treatment (FBT-BN) could be effective for this patient population. The objective of this study was to compare the relative efficacy of these two specific therapies, FBT-BN and CBT-A. In addition, a smaller group was randomized to a non-specific treatment (supportive psychotherapy [SPT]), whose data were to be used if there were no differences between FBT-BN and CBT-A at end of treatment (EOT). Method This two-site RCT (Chicago and Stanford) randomized 130 participants (aged 12–18 years) meeting DSM, 4th Edition criteria for BN or partial BN (binge eating and purging ≥once per week for six months). Outcomes were assessed at baseline, EOT, 6 and 12 months post treatment. Treatments involved 18 outpatient sessions over 6 months. Primary outcome was defined as abstinence from binge eating and purging for 4 weeks prior to assessment, using the Eating Disorder Examination. Results Participants in FBT-BN achieved higher abstinence rates than in CBT-A at EOT (39% vs. 20%; p=.040, number needed to treat [NNT]=5) and at 6-month follow-up (44% vs. 25%; p=.030, NNT=5). Abstinence rates between these two groups did not differ statistically at 12- month follow-up (49% vs. 32%; p=.130, NNT=6). Conclusion FBT-BN is more effective in promoting abstinence from binge eating and purging than CBT-A in adolescent BN at EOT and 6-month follow-up. By 12-month follow-up there were no statistically significant differences between the two treatments.

Overview

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 · 10.1016/j.jaac.2015.08.008

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 243

Metadata

Authors
Le Grange, D., Lock, J., Agras, W. S., Bryson, S. W., & Jo, B.
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-11
Volume
54
Issue
11
Pages
886-894.e2
ISSN
0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1958455633
Cited by
243
References
8
FWCI
29.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized Clinical Trial of Family-Based Treatment and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Adolescent Bulimia Nervosa. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jaac.2015.08.008
The paper
Le Grange, D., Lock, J., Agras, W. S., Bryson, S. W., & Jo, B. (2015). Randomized Clinical Trial of Family-Based Treatment and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Adolescent Bulimia Nervosa. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2015.08.008

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.