Evidence Hub

Mechanisms of an Inhibitory Control Training to Reduce Binge Eating-The Randomized Controlled MIND BINGES Trial

Sebastian M. Max, K. Giel, Christian Plewnia, S. Weller, Andreas J. Fallgatter, Veronika Lossa, Stephan Zipfel, Kathrin Schag

International Journal of Eating Disorders, 2026

67 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Psychotherapy is the first-line treatment for eating disorders (EDs), yet only about half of patients benefit long-term. Bulimia nervosa (BN), Binge-Eating-Disorder (BED), and non-underweight EDs with regular binge eating (> 2 binge-eating episodes per month within the last 3 months) (OSFED/UFED) form a transdiagnostic group characterized by elevated impulsivity. Inhibitory control training (ICT) approaches targeting impulsivity may be relevant. However, the role of feedback within ICT remains insufficiently understood.

METHOD

MIND BINGES is a prospective randomized controlled proof-of-principle trial including 67 patients with regular binge-eating behavior. ICT was a food-modified antisaccade paradigm and comprised six sessions over 2 weeks. Patients were randomized to one of three conditions: (a) ICT with task performance feedback (TF), (b) ICT without feedback (TNF), or (c) control group without ICT. The primary outcome was the reduction of binge-eating frequency 4 and 12 weeks after ICT. Secondary outcomes included ED psychopathology, inhibitory control performance, impulsivity, and self-efficacy.

RESULTS

All three groups reduced binge-eating frequency 4 and 12 weeks after ICT compared to the baseline. Four weeks after ICT, TF resulted in significantly greater reductions in binge-eating episodes compared to TNF and CG. These differences washed out after 12 weeks. Across secondary outcomes, all groups improved over time.

DISCUSSION

Feedback contributes to short…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 67 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