ArticleThe International journal of eating disorders2025
Clinical Experiences Using Family Based Treatment for Eating Disorders.
Article in The International journal of eating disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An exploratory study of patient preferences for closed or open weighing following discharge from acute treatment for anorexia nervosa.Eating disorders · 2026Article
- Clinician knowledge and perceptions of evidence-based practice in pediatric eating disorders in Western Canada.Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDespite the availability of several evidence-based treatments for eating disorders (EDs), including Family-Based Treatment (FBT), therapist drift from evidence-based treatments in real-life clinical settings is common. This study explores clinicians' use of FBT techniques and identifies clinician-reported barriers to their use in real-world settings.
methodsClinicians (N = 54) who self-identified as using FBT for EDs were recruited through social media, professional listservs, and mental health provider databases. Participants completed an online survey comprised of questions developed alongside ED researchers (n = 5). Questions included quantitative self-rating of frequency of FBT technique use and usefulness, limitations of the treatment, and barriers to effective implementation of FBT.
resultsDescriptive statistics indicated frequent use of most FBT techniques (i.e., Ms > 75 on scales ranging from 0 [never use] to 100 [always use]). On a scale from 0 (not at all a barrier) to 100 (a major barrier), ratings of FBT barriers ranged from 25.07 (i.e., caregiver motivation decreases when learning reasons for ED) to 80.70 (i.e., low time resources). Regarding limitations of FBT, between 37% and 42.6% of participants indicated challenges in establishing an alliance with youth and validating their experiences as barriers to treatment success. DISCUSSION: Overall, clinicians reported frequent use of FBT techniques. Barriers that received higher mean ratings included items related to emotional processes experienced by caregivers, caregiver/patient beliefs related to weight stigma/diet culture, resource and time-related constraints, and challenges with caregiver buy-in/beliefs about treatment. Future research should explore ways to adapt FBT to address these barriers within naturalistic settings.
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.