Cited by 76Eating Disorders and BehaviorsMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

Teaching Intuitive Eating and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Skills Via a Web-Based Intervention: A Pilot Single-Arm Intervention Study

Open access
Boucher, Sara, Edwards, Olivia, Gray, Andrew, Nada-Raja, Shyamala, Lillis, Jason, Tylka, Tracy L, Horwath, Caroline C·2016·JMIR Research Protocols

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Middle-aged women are at risk of weight gain and associated comorbidities. Deliberate restriction of food intake (dieting) produces short-term weight loss but is largely unsuccessful for long-term weight management. Two promising approaches for the prevention of weight gain are intuitive eating (ie, eating in accordance with hunger and satiety signals) and the development of greater psychological flexibility (ie, the aim of acceptance and commitment therapy [ACT]). OBJECTIVES: This pilot study investigated the usage, acceptability, and feasibility of "Mind, Body, Food," a Web-based weight gain prevention intervention prototype that teaches intuitive eating and psychological flexibility skills. METHODS: , mean Intuitive Eating Scale [IES-1] total score 53.4 [SD 7.46], classified as below average) who were recruited from the general population in Dunedin, New Zealand. Module completion and study site metrics were assessed using Google Analytics. Use of an online self-monitoring tool was determined by entries saved to a secure online database. Intervention acceptability was assessed postintervention. BMI, intuitive eating, binge eating, psychological flexibility, and general mental and physical health were assessed pre- and postintervention and 3-months postintervention. RESULTS: Of the 40 women enrolled in the study, 12 (30%) completed all 12 modules (median 7.5 [interquartile range, IQR, 2-12] modules) and 4 (10%) used the self-monitoring tool for all 14 weeks of the intervention period (median 3 [IQR 1-9] weeks). Among 26 women who completed postintervention assessments, most women rated "Mind, Body, Food" as useful (20/26, 77%), easy to use (17/25, 68%) and liked the intervention (22/25, 88%). From pre- to postintervention, there were statistically significant within-group increases in intuitive eating (IES-2 total score P<.001; all IES-2 subscale scores: P ≤.01), psychological flexibility (P=.01), and general mental health (P<.001) as well as significant decreases in binge eating (P=.01). At the 3-month follow-up, IES-2 improvements were maintained, and there were further improvements in binge eating (P<.001) and general mental health (P=.03), and a marginal yet nonsignificant tendency for further improvement in psychological flexibility (P=.06). There were no significant within-group changes in BMI from pre- to postintervention and postintervention to 3-month follow-up (P=.46 and P=.93, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The "Mind, Body, Food" prototype Web-based intervention is appealing to middle-aged women and may be a useful tool to help women learn intuitive eating and ACT skills, reduce binge eating, and maintain weight over 3 months. Further work to improve the user experience and engagement is required before testing the online intervention in a randomized controlled trial.

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 · 10.2196/resprot.5861

Cites

61 of 61 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

1 of the 62 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boucher, S., Edwards, O., Gray, A., Nada-Raja, S., Lillis, J., Tylka, T. L., & Horwath, C. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Otago (NZ)
  • Brown University (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
Horwath, Caroline C
Venue
JMIR Research Protocols
Published
2016-10-14
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
e180
ISSN
1929-0748 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2530140318
Cited by
76
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
5.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Research Protocols (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Otago University Research Archive (University of Otago) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K23DK097143)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
intuitive eating, acceptance and commitment therapy, psychological flexibility, online intervention, weight gain prevention, middle-aged women, binge eating, self-monitoring, treatment acceptability, feasibility

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