↓ Skip to main content

The PED-t trial protocol: The effect of physical exercise –and dietary therapy compared with cognitive behavior therapy in treatment of bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
384 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The PED-t trial protocol: The effect of physical exercise –and dietary therapy compared with cognitive behavior therapy in treatment of bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12888-017-1312-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Therese Fostervold Mathisen, Jan H. Rosenvinge, Gunn Pettersen, Oddgeir Friborg, KariAnne Vrabel, Solfrid Bratland-Sanda, Mette Svendsen, Trine Stensrud, Maria Bakland, Rolf Wynn, Jorunn Sundgot-Borgen

Abstract

Sufferers from bulimia nervosa (BN) and binge eating disorder (BED) underestimate the severity risk of their illness and, therefore, postpone seeking professional help for years. Moreover, less than one in five actually seek professional help and only 50% respond to current treatments, such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). The impetus for the present trial is to explore a novel combination treatment approach adapted from physical exercise- and dietary therapy (PED-t). The therapeutic underpinnings of these separate treatment components are well-known, but their combination to treat BN and BED have never been previously tested. The purpose of this paper is to provide the rationale for this new treatment approach and to outline the specific methods and procedures. The PED-t trial uses a prospective randomized controlled design. It allocates women between 18 and 40 years (BMI range 17.5-35.0) to groups consisting of 5-8 members who receive either CBT or PED-t for 16 weeks. Excess participants are allocated to a waiting list control group condition. All participants are assessed at baseline, post-treatment, 6, 12 and 24 months' post-follow-up, respectively, and monitored for changes in biological, psychological and therapy process variables. The primary outcome relates to the ED symptom severity, while secondary outcomes relates to treatment effects on physical health, treatment satisfaction, therapeutic alliance, and cost-effectiveness. We aim to disseminate the results in high-impact journals, preferable open access, and at international conferences. We expect that the new treatment will perform equal to CBT in terms of behavioral and psychological symptoms, but better in terms of reducing somatic symptoms and complications. We also expect that the new treatment will improve physical fitness and thereby, quality of life. Hence, the new treatment will add to the portfolio of evidence-based therapies and thereby provide a good treatment alternative for females with BN and BED. Prospectively registered in REC the 16th of December 2013 with the identifier number 2013/1871 , and in Clinical Trials the 17th of February 2014 with the identifier number NCT02079935 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 384 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 384 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 70 18%
Student > Master 50 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 6%
Researcher 19 5%
Other 59 15%
Unknown 137 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 65 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 51 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 8%
Sports and Recreations 28 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 4%
Other 42 11%
Unknown 154 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 June 2021.
All research outputs
#4,209,937
of 25,124,631 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#1,655
of 5,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,430
of 315,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#30
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,124,631 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,356 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.