Department of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30322, USA.
Int J Eat Disord. 2013 Jul;46(5):386-94. doi: 10.1002/eat.22090.
The field of eating disorders (EDs) treatment has been beset by a marked disjunction between scientific evidence and clinical application. We describe the nature and scope of the research-practice gap in the ED field.
We draw on surveys and broader literature to better understand the research-practice gap in ED treatment and reasons for resistance to evidence-based practice.
We identify three sources of the research-practice gap: (1) attitudinal factors, (2) differences in the definition of "evidence," and (3) cognitive factors, especially naïve realism and confirmation bias. We affirm the role of science as a safeguard against human fallibility and as a means of bridging the research-practice gap, and delineate key principles of scientific thinking for ED researchers and practitioners.
We conclude with proposals for narrowing the research-practice gap in ED treatment and enhancing the quality of interventions for ED clients.
饮食失调（ED）治疗领域存在着科学证据与临床应用之间明显脱节的问题。我们描述了 ED 领域研究与实践之间差距的性质和范围。
我们借鉴了调查和更广泛的文献，以更好地了解 ED 治疗中研究与实践之间的差距，以及对循证实践的抵制的原因。
我们确定了研究与实践之间差距的三个来源：（1）态度因素，（2）“证据”定义的差异，以及（3）认知因素，特别是天真现实主义和确认偏差。我们肯定了科学作为防止人类易错性的手段和作为弥合研究与实践之间差距的手段的作用，并为 ED 研究人员和从业者描绘了科学思维的关键原则。
我们最后提出了缩小 ED 治疗中研究与实践之间差距和提高 ED 患者干预质量的建议。
