Evidence Hub

Self-regulation deficits moderate treatment outcomes in a clinical trial evaluating just-in-time adaptive interventions as an augmentation to cognitive-behavioral therapy for bulimia-spectrum eating disorders

E. Presseller, M. Wilkinson, C. Trainor, E. Lampe, A. Juarascio

International Journal of Eating Disorders, 2022

55 participants · 11 citations

Abstract

Objective: Just-in-time adaptive interventions (JITAIs), momentary interventions delivered at identified times of risk, may improve skill utilization during cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT-E) for bulimia-spectrum eating disorders (BN-EDs). JITAIs may be especially helpful for individuals with self-regulation deficits, including emotion regulation deficits and elevated impulsivity. Method: Participants (N = 55 with BN-EDs) received 16 sessions of CBT-E with electronic self-monitoring and were randomized to receive JITAIs (JITAIs-On) or not receive JITAIs (JITAIs-Off). Baseline Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) and UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale (UPPS-P) total scores were examined as moderators of baseline to post-treatment change in binge episodes, compensatory behaviors, and Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) global score using repeated measures ANOVAs. Results: Emotion regulation difficulties significantly moderated compensatory behavior change (F[1, 51] = 4.31, p = .04, ηp2 = 0.08) such that individuals with emotion regulation deficits demonstrated greater improvements in the JITAIs-On condition. Impulsivity moderated change in binge episodes (F[1, 51] = 8.94, p = .004, ηp2 = 0.15) and compensatory behaviors (F[1, 51] = 7.83, p = .007, ηp2 = 0.13), such that individuals with high impulsivity showed greater improvement in the JITAIs-On condition. Neither DERS nor UPPS-P scores moderated EDE global score change. Discussion: JITAIs appear particularly…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 55 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