Premium
Cue reactivity as a predictor of outcome with bulimia nervosa
Author(s) -
Carter Frances A.,
Bulik Cynthia M.,
McIntosh Virginia V.,
Joyce Peter R.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
international journal of eating disorders
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.785
H-Index - 138
eISSN - 1098-108X
pISSN - 0276-3478
DOI - 10.1002/eat.10041
Subject(s) - bulimia nervosa , cue reactivity , psychology , reactivity (psychology) , clinical psychology , cognition , clinical trial , randomized controlled trial , binge eating , eating disorders , psychiatry , medicine , craving , addiction , alternative medicine , pathology
The present study sought to evaluate specific hypotheses concerning the relation between cue reactivity and outcome among women with bulimia nervosa. Participants were 135 women aged between 17 and 45 years with a current, primary diagnosis of bulimia nervosa who participated in a randomized clinical trial evaluating the additive efficacy of exposure and nonexposure‐based behavior therapy, to a core of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). Physiological, self‐report, and behavioral measures of cue reactivity to individualized high‐risk binge foods were obtained at pretreatment and posttreatment. Primary, secondary, and tertiary outcome measures are reported for posttreatment and six‐month follow‐up. Self‐report measures of cue reactivity at posttreatment were significantly positively associated with symptomatology at posttreatment. Cue reactivity at posttreatment was significantly positively associated with symptomatology at 6‐month follow‐up. However, cue reactivity at posttreatment did not contribute to the prediction of outcome at follow‐up over and above posttreatment outcome. The notion that pretreatment cue reactivity may predict which treatment modality will be most beneficial (exposure or nonexposure‐based treatment), as measured by reductions in symptomatology at posttreatment could not be supported. Implications for future research are discussed. © 2002 by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Int J Eat Disord 31: 240–250, 2002; DOI 10.1002/eat.10041