Evidence Hub

Group psychotherapy for eating disorders: A meta-analysis

Grenon R, Schwartze D, Hammond N, Ivanova I, Mcquaid N, Proulx G, Tasca GA

The International journal of eating disorders, 2017

1,853 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In the current meta-analysis, we review the effect of group psychotherapy compared to both wait-list controls and other active treatments for adults with eating disorders (EDs).

METHOD: Twenty-seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that provide direct comparisons with a total of 1,853 participants were included.

RESULTS: Group psychotherapy is significantly more effective than wait-list controls at achieving abstinence rates of binge eating and/or purging (RR = 5.51, 95% CI: 3.73, 8.12), decreasing the frequency of binge eating and/or purging (g = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.51, 0.90), and reducing related ED psychopathology (g = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.66) after treatment. The effects of group psychotherapy and other active treatments (e.g., behavioral weight loss, self-help, individual psychotherapy) did not differ on any outcome at post-treatment or at follow-ups. Group cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and other forms of group psychotherapy did not differ significantly on outcomes at any time point.

DISCUSSION: Additional research is needed to evaluate other group psychotherapy approaches, along with CBT, to provide more evidence-based treatment options for individuals with an ED. Group psychotherapy appears as effective as other common treatments and is perhaps more cost-effective than the most popular treatment, individual psychotherapy. Only 8.33% of comparisons in the current meta-analysis had at least 80% power to detect a moderate effect (d = .50) and we recommend…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,853 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free