Cognitive behavioural therapy compared to control conditions in treating bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.3 3区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

British Journal of Clinical Psychology Pub Date : 2026-11-01 Epub Date: 2026-05-22 DOI:10.1111/bjc.70070

Angeliki L Sioziou, Anastasios Stefanou, Felicia Dimitrakopoulou, Menelaos Skarlatos, Andreas S Lappas, Christina Mesiari, Aikaterini Argyrou, Evangelos Ntouros, Nikolaos Christodoulou, Vasilios-Panteleimon Bozikas, Myrto Samara

{"title":"Cognitive behavioural therapy compared to control conditions in treating bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Angeliki L Sioziou, Anastasios Stefanou, Felicia Dimitrakopoulou, Menelaos Skarlatos, Andreas S Lappas, Christina Mesiari, Aikaterini Argyrou, Evangelos Ntouros, Nikolaos Christodoulou, Vasilios-Panteleimon Bozikas, Myrto Samara","doi":"10.1111/bjc.70070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Our systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate how Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy (CBT) performs against control conditions, such as waiting-list, self-help interventions, psychological and pill placebos and treatment as usual (TAU) in Bulimia Nervosa (BN) and Binge Eating Disorder (BED).Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CBT to any control condition, in patients with BED and BN. Analyses employed random-effects models, calculating risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, weighted mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes and standardized mean differences (SMD) when scales varied. The primary outcomes were remission and binge eating frequency. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses assessed robustness.Results: 42 RCTs (2807 participants randomized) were included. CBT demonstrated superiority over waitlists in achieving remission (RR = 3.21, 95% CI: 2.15; 4.81) and in reducing binge-eating frequency (SMD = -.88, 95% CI: -1.08; -.69). However, compared to self-help, effects were attenuated for remission (RR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.19; 1.95) and were not significant for binge frequency (SMD = -.14, 95% CI: -.32; .04). Data were scarce for other inactive comparators.Discussion: The superiority of CBT is contingent on the comparator used, highlighting the necessity for rigorous controls such as a psychological placebo or other therapy modalities.","PeriodicalId":48211,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Clinical Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1248-1261"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13655980/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bjc.70070","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Our systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate how Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy (CBT) performs against control conditions, such as waiting-list, self-help interventions, psychological and pill placebos and treatment as usual (TAU) in Bulimia Nervosa (BN) and Binge Eating Disorder (BED).

Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CBT to any control condition, in patients with BED and BN. Analyses employed random-effects models, calculating risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, weighted mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes and standardized mean differences (SMD) when scales varied. The primary outcomes were remission and binge eating frequency. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses assessed robustness.

Results: 42 RCTs (2807 participants randomized) were included. CBT demonstrated superiority over waitlists in achieving remission (RR = 3.21, 95% CI: 2.15; 4.81) and in reducing binge-eating frequency (SMD = -.88, 95% CI: -1.08; -.69). However, compared to self-help, effects were attenuated for remission (RR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.19; 1.95) and were not significant for binge frequency (SMD = -.14, 95% CI: -.32; .04). Data were scarce for other inactive comparators.

Discussion: The superiority of CBT is contingent on the comparator used, highlighting the necessity for rigorous controls such as a psychological placebo or other therapy modalities.

查看原文本刊更多论文

认知行为疗法与对照条件在治疗神经性贪食症和暴食症中的比较：一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。

目的：我们的系统回顾和荟萃分析旨在探讨认知行为疗法（CBT）对神经性贪食症（BN）和暴食症（BED）的控制条件，如等候名单，自助干预，心理和药丸安慰剂以及常规治疗（TAU）的效果。方法：我们系统地检索MEDLINE、Embase、PsycINFO、Cochrane CENTRAL、WHO ICTRP、ClinicalTrials.gov，检索在BED和BN患者中比较CBT与任何对照条件的随机对照试验（RCTs）。分析采用随机效应模型，计算二分类结局的风险比（RR）、连续结局的加权平均差异（MD）和不同量表时的标准化平均差异（SMD）。主要结果是缓解和暴食频率。亚组分析和敏感性分析评估稳健性。结果：纳入42项随机对照试验（随机2807名受试者）。CBT在达到缓解（RR = 3.21, 95% CI: 2.15; 4.81）和减少暴食频率（SMD = - 0.88, 95% CI: -1.08; - 0.69）方面优于候补名单。然而，与自助相比，缓解的影响减弱（RR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.19; 1.95），暴食频率的影响不显著（SMD = - 0.14, 95% CI: - 0.32; 0.04）。其他不参与比较国的数据很少。讨论：CBT的优越性取决于所使用的比较物，强调了严格控制的必要性，如心理安慰剂或其他治疗方式。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

British Journal of Clinical Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

5.80

自引率

3.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： The British Journal of Clinical Psychology publishes original research, both empirical and theoretical, on all aspects of clinical psychology: - clinical and abnormal psychology featuring descriptive or experimental studies - aetiology, assessment and treatment of the whole range of psychological disorders irrespective of age group and setting - biological influences on individual behaviour - studies of psychological interventions and treatment on individuals, dyads, families and groups