ArticleBehaviour research and therapy2015
Assessing program sustainability in an eating disorder prevention effectiveness trial delivered by college clinicians.
Article in Behaviour research and therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of the sustainability for an evidence-based eating disorder prevention program delivered by college peer educators.Implementation science : IS · 2024Trial
- Implementation factors that predict larger effects from a peer educator delivered eating disorder prevention program at universities.Journal of consulting and clinical psychology · 2023Article
- Feasibility and Acceptability of a Guided Self-Help, Text-Messaging Intervention to Promote Positive Body Image of Emerging Adult Women.Frontiers in global women's health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Sustainability of the Body Project, a dissonance-based selective eating disorder prevention program supported by efficacy and effectiveness trials, has not previously been examined. This mixed-methods study collected qualitative and quantitative data on training, supervision, and the intervention from 27 mental health clinicians from eight US universities who participated in an effectiveness trial and quantitative data on 2-year sustainability of program delivery. Clinicians, who were primarily masters-level mental health providers, had limited experience delivering manualized interventions. They rated the training and manual favorably, noting that they particularly liked the role-plays of session activities and intervention rationale, but requested more discussion of processes and group management issues. Clinicians were satisfied receiving emailed supervision based on videotape review. They reported enjoying delivering the Body Project but reported some challenges with the manualized format and time constraints. Most clinicians anticipated running more groups after the study ended but only four universities (50%) reported providing additional Body Project groups at the 1-year follow-up assessment and sustained delivery of the groups decreased substantially two years after study completion, with only one university (12%) continuing to deliver groups. The most commonly reported barriers for conducting additional groups were limited time and high staff turnover.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.