↓ Skip to main content

Feedback versus no feedback in improving patient outcome in group psychotherapy for eating disorders (F-EAT): protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 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
Feedback versus no feedback in improving patient outcome in group psychotherapy for eating disorders (F-EAT): protocol for a randomized clinical trial
Published in
Trials, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-15-138
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annika Helgadóttir Davidsen, Stig Poulsen, Mette Waaddegaard, Jane Lindschou, Marianne Lau

Abstract

Continuous feedback on patient improvement and the therapeutic alliance may reduce the number of dropouts and increase patient outcome. There are, however, only three published randomized trials on the effect of feedback on the treatment of eating disorders, showing inconclusive results, and there are no randomized trials on the effect of feedback in group therapy. Accordingly the current randomized clinical trial, initiated in September 2012 at the outpatient clinic for eating disorders at Stolpegaard Psychotherapy Centre, aims to investigate the impact of continuous feedback on attendance and outcome in group psychotherapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 145 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 14%
Student > Master 21 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 41 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 58 40%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 7%
Social Sciences 10 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 9 6%
Unknown 44 30%