Oregon Research Institute, United States.
Oregon Research Institute, United States.
Clin Psychol Rev. 2019 Jun;70:91-107. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2019.04.004. Epub 2019 Apr 8.
Many trials have provided support for dissonance-based eating disorder prevention programs. This meta-analytic review characterized the average intervention effects and tested whether various intervention, participant, and facilitator features correlated with larger effects to guide implementation of optimally effective versions of this program. We identified 56 trials that evaluated 68 dissonance-based eating disorder prevention programs (7808 participants). Average intervention effect sizes (d) relative to minimal intervention control conditions and credible alternative interventions (respectively) were 0.57 and 0.31 for thin-ideal internalization, 0.42 and 0.18 for body dissatisfaction, 0.37 and 0.17 for dieting, 0.29 and 0.21 for negative affect, and 0.31 and 0.13 for eating disorder symptoms. As hypothesized, effects were larger for interventions with more dissonance-inducing activities, more group sessions, and larger group sizes, as well as when delivered in-person versus on-line, sessions were recorded, participation was voluntary, body dissatisfaction was required, participants were mid-adolescents or adults (versus older adolescence), there were more ethnic minority participants, groups were led by clinicians versus researchers and at least two facilitators, and when facilitators received more training and supervision. Unexpectedly from a dissonance-induction perspective, effects were larger when participants were compensated. Results offer directions for maximizing the benefits of implementation efforts with dissonance-based eating disorder prevention programs, and may hold lessons for preventing other public health problems with dissonance-based interventions.
许多试验为基于不和谐的饮食失调预防计划提供了支持。本元分析综述的特点是平均干预效果,并测试了各种干预、参与者和促进者的特征是否与更大的效果相关,以指导该计划的最优有效版本的实施。我们确定了 56 项试验,评估了 68 项基于不和谐的饮食失调预防计划(7808 名参与者)。与最小干预对照组和可信替代干预组(分别)相比,平均干预效果大小(d)为:对理想体型内化的影响为 0.57,对身体不满的影响为 0.42,对节食的影响为 0.37,对负面情绪的影响为 0.29,对饮食失调症状的影响为 0.31。正如假设的那样,对于具有更多不和谐诱导活动、更多小组会议和更大小组规模的干预措施,以及面对面而非在线、记录会议、自愿参与、需要身体不满、参与者是青少年中期或成年人(而非青少年晚期)、有更多少数民族参与者、由临床医生而非研究人员领导的小组以及至少有两名促进者,以及当促进者接受更多培训和监督时,效果更大。从不和谐诱导的角度来看,出乎意料的是,当参与者得到补偿时,效果更大。结果为最大限度地发挥基于不和谐的饮食失调预防计划实施工作的效益提供了方向,并可能为基于不和谐的干预措施预防其他公共卫生问题提供了经验教训。