ArticleThe International journal of eating disorders2024
Cognitive-behavioral therapy for avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder: A proof-of-concept for mechanisms of change and target engagement.
Article in The International journal of eating disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Exploratory Study of Neural Response to Food Cues Following Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder.The International journal of eating disorders · 2026Trial
- Psychological Treatment for Pediatric Feeding Disorder (PFD) and Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID).The International journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Virtually Delivered Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder.The International journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Current Status of the Identification, Differential Diagnosis, and Psychological Treatment of Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder.The Psychiatric clinics of North America · 2026Review
- Fear, Feeding, and the Gut: Nutrition Support Considerations in Adults with ARFID and Gastrointestinal Symptoms.Nutrients · 2026Review
- A study protocol for a therapist guided digital cognitive-behavioral therapy for children with avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder and their parents.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder - the need to improve diagnostic clearance.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2025Article
- Current Concepts in Gastroparesis and Gastric Neuromuscular Disorders-Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A Role for the Microbiota-Gut-Brain Axis in Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder: A New Conceptual Model.The International journal of eating disorders · 2024Review
- Article
- Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder: Review and Recent Advances.Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing) · 2024Review
- Recent Advances in Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy for Eating Disorders (CBT-ED).Current psychiatry reports · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCognitive-behavioral therapy for avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID; CBT-AR) theoretically targets three prototypic motivations (sensory sensitivity, lack of interest/low appetite, fear of aversive consequences), aligned with three modularized interventions. As an exploratory investigation, we: (1) evaluated change in candidate mechanisms in relationship to change in ARFID severity, and (2) tested if assignment (vs. not) to a module resulted in larger improvements in the corresponding mechanism.
methodMales and females (N = 42; 10-55 years) participated in an open trial of CBT-AR.
resultsDecreases in scaled scores for each candidate mechanism had medium to large correlations with decreases in ARFID severity-sensory sensitivity: -0.7 decrease (r = .42, p = .01); lack of interest/low appetite: -0.3 decrease (r = .60, p < .0001); and fear of aversive consequences: -1.1 decrease (r = .33, p = .05). Linear mixed models revealed significant weekly improvements for each candidate mechanism across the full sample (ps < .0001). There were significant interactions for the sensory and fear of aversive consequences modules-for each, participants who received the corresponding module had significantly larger decreases in the candidate mechanism than those who did not receive the module. DISCUSSION: Sensory sensitivity and fear of aversive consequences improved more if the CBT-AR module was received, but lack of interest/low appetite may improve regardless of receipt of the corresponding module. Future research is needed to test target engagement in CBT-AR with adaptive treatment designs, and to identify valid and sensitive measures of candidate mechanisms. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE: The mechanisms through which components of CBT-AR work have yet to be elucidated. We conducted an exploratory investigation to test if assignment (vs. not) to a CBT-AR module resulted in larger improvements in the corresponding prototypic ARFID motivation that the module intended to target. Measures of the sensory sensitivity and the fear of aversive consequences motivations improved more in those who received the corresponding treatment module, whereas the lack of interest/low appetite measure improved regardless of if the corresponding module was received.
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.