Search

Third-wave behavioural interventions are increasingly popular for treating and preventing mental health conditions. Recently, researchers have begun testing whether these interventions can effectively targeting eating disorder risk factors (disordered eating, body image concerns). This meta-analysis examined whether third-wave behavioural interventions (acceptance and commitment therapy; dialectical behaviour therapy; mindfulness-based interventions; compassion-focused therapy) show potential for being effective eating disorder prevention programs, by testing their effects on eating disorder risk factors in samples without an eating disorder. Twenty-four studies (13 randomized trials) were included. Most studies delivered selective prevention programs (i.e. participants who reported elevated risk factor). Third-wave interventions led to significant pre-post (g = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.43, 0.75) and follow-up (g = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.38, 1.28) improvements in disordered eating, and significant pre-post improvements in body image (g = 0.35; 95% CI = 0.13, 0.56). DBT-based interventions were associated with the largest effects. Third-wave interventions were also significantly more efficacious than wait-lists (g = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.09, 0.69) in reducing disordered eating, but did not differ to other interventions (g = 0.25; 95% CI = -0.06, 0.57). Preliminary evidence suggests that third-wave interventions may have a beneficial effect in ameliorating eating disorder risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intimate partner abuse (or relationship abuse) against women is recognised as a major public health issue. A number of relationship abuse prevention programs targeted at youth have been developed in Australia. These programs are generally aimed at changing attitudes, and take the stance that girls should not be viewed as being responsible for protecting themselves against violence. In this paper it is argued that the current, dominant focus on physical violence, over other forms of relationship abuse, limits the potential effectiveness of programs that might otherwise help young people to resist the development of abusive dynamics. It is also argued that programs that presume a victim status for girls and a perpetrator status for boys are both inconsistent with contemporary evidence and unlikely to empower young people at risk of chronic perpetration and/or victimisation to avoid such outcomes. A dyadic slippery slope model of chronic relationship abuse is proposed and new directions for prevention research in this area are suggested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]