Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS:
Title: Are empirically-supported therapies for bulimic symptoms associated with better self-rated outcomes than non-empirically supported therapies?
Author: Van Schaick, R.
Awarding Body: University College London
Current Institution: University College London (University of London)
Date of Award: 2011
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please try the link below.
Access from Institution:
Aim: To investigate whether engaging in empirically-supported psychological therapies (ESTs) is associated with improved self-rated treatment outcomes in clients with bulimia nervosa and related disorders (BN-RDs). Method: 98 people who had engaged in psychological therapy for BN-RD completed a questionnaire which assessed the recalled specific contents of their most recent set of psychological therapy and self-rated therapy outcomes. Results: Contrary to prediction, self-rated treatment outcomes did not differ between respondents who engaged in ESTs and non-ESTs, or between respondents who engaged in CBT judged as ‘adequate’ and CBT judged as ‘inadequate’. Respondents who engaged in a specialist form of CBT for bulimia nervosa (CBT-BN) reported greater improvement than those who engaged in standard CBT. Conclusions: The findings suggest that treatments that are labelled as ESTs are not necessarily perceived as more beneficial by clients with eating disorders than non-ESTs. However, there is some evidence that a specific evidence-based therapy (CBT-BN) led to better self-rated treatment outcomes than standard CBT.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID:  DOI: Not available