Cited by 41Eating Disorders and BehaviorsDigital Mental Health InterventionsNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

A survey of attitudes towards computerized self-help for eating disorders within a community-based sample

McClay, Carrie-Anne, Waters, Louise, Schmidt, Ulrike, Williams, Christopher·2016·Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bulimia nervosa (BN) is an eating disorder with many physical, psychological and social consequences. Guided self-help (GSH) is recommended in the treatment of BN (NICE, 2004). One of the ways in which to provide GSH is via the internet using evidence-based packages with regular support from a clinician or trained support worker. AIMS: The aim of this community-based survey was to investigate attitudes towards online self-help for eating disorders and the support required whilst using such an approach. METHOD: Two-hundred and fifty-three participants with bulimic symptoms completed the survey. The sample was recruited primarily online. The mean age was 29.11 years (SD = 8.67; min = 16, max = 64). RESULTS: Attitudes towards online self-help (SH) for eating disorders were very positive. The inclusion of some form of support to accompany such an intervention was important to the majority of participants. Remote mediums of support such as e-mail, a forum and text messaging were most often selected as helpful. Most participants expressed a preference for weekly support contacts and for flexible support lengths that could respond to support needs as required. CONCLUSIONS: Online self-help for eating disorders is a desirable treatment option for many individuals. The information gathered regarding preferences in the type, medium, duration and frequency of support could be used in the development of future self-help strategies in order to maximize uptake, retention and outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1352465814000484

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McClay, C.-A., Waters, L., Schmidt, U., & Williams, C.
Affiliations
University of Glasgow (GB)
Corresponding author
Williams, Christopher
Venue
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy
Published
2014-11-28
Volume
44
Issue
1
Pages
65-78
ISSN
  • 1352-4658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1833
OpenAlex
W2142955320
Cited by
41
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 19 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
1.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
bulimia nervosa, eating disorders, online self-help, clinician support, remote support, email, online forums, text messaging
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attitude, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motivation, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Help Groups, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Internet, Electronic Mail, Bulimia Nervosa, Community-Based Participatory Research, Text Messaging

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