Family-based treatment (FBT) is the first-line treatment for adolescent anorexia nervosa (AN). Yet, remission is not achieved for about half of adolescents with AN receiving FBT. Understanding patient- and parent-level factors that predict FBT response may inform treatment development and improve outcomes.

Network analysis was used to identify the most central symptoms of AN in adolescents who completed the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) prior to FBT (N = 409). Bridge pathways between adolescent AN and parental self-efficacy in facilitating their child's recovery from AN were identified in a subset of participants (n = 184). Central and bridge symptoms were tested as predictors of early response (⩾2.4 kg weight gain by the fourth session of FBT) and end-of-treatment weight restoration [⩾95% expected body weight (EBW)] and full remission (⩾95% EBW and EDE score within 1 standard deviation of norms).

The most central symptoms of adolescent AN included desiring weight loss, dietary restraint, and feeling fat. These symptoms predicted early response, but not end-of-treatment outcomes. Bridge symptoms were parental beliefs about their responsibility to renourish their child, adolescent discomfort eating in front of others, and adolescent dietary restraint. Bridge symptoms predicted end-of-treatment weight restoration, but not early response nor full remission.

Findings highlight the prognostic utility of core symptoms of adolescent AN. Parent beliefs about their responsibility to renourish their child may maintain associations between parental self-efficacy and AN psychopathology. These findings could inform strategies to adapt FBT and improve outcomes.

Family-based treatment (FBT) is an efficacious intervention for adolescents with an eating disorder. Evaluated to a lesser degree among adolescents, enhanced cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT-E) has shown promising results. This study compared the relative effectiveness of FBT and CBT-E, and as per manualized CBT-E, the sample was divided into a lower weight [<90% median body mass index (mBMI)], and higher weight cohort (⩾90%mBMI).

Participants (N = 97) aged 12–18 years, with a DSM-5 eating disorder diagnosis (largely restrictive, excluding Avoidant Restrictive Food Intake Disorder), and their parents, chose between FBT and CBT-E. Assessments were administered at baseline, end-of-treatment (EOT), and follow-up (6 and 12 months). Treatment comprised of 20 sessions over 6 months, except for the lower weight cohort where CBT-E comprised 40 sessions over 9–12 months. Primary outcomes were slope of weight gain and change in Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) Global Score at EOT.

Slope of weight gain at EOT was significantly higher for FBT than for CBT-E (lower weight, est. = 0.597, s.e. = 0.096, p < 0.001; higher weight, est. = 0.495, s.e. = 0.83, p < 0.001), but not at follow-up. There were no differences in the EDE Global Score or most secondary outcome measures at any time-point. Several baseline variables emerged as potential treatment effect moderators at EOT. Choosing between FBT and CBT-E resulted in older and less well participants opting for CBT-E.

Results underscore the efficiency of FBT to facilitate weight gain among underweight adolescents. FBT and CBT-E achieved similar outcomes in other domains assessed, making CBT-E a viable treatment for adolescents with an eating disorder.

Treatment Outcome in Eating Disorders; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT03599921.

To determine the impact of specialized treatments, relative to comparator treatments, upon the weight and psychological symptoms of anorexia nervosa (AN) at end-of-treatment (EOT) and follow-up.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) between January 1980 and December 2017 that reported the effects of at least two treatments on AN were screened. Weight and psychological symptoms were analyzed separately for each study. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed, and studies were assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria and Cochrane risk of bias tool.

We identified 35 eligible RCTs, comprising data from 2524 patients. Meta-analyses revealed a significant treatment effect on weight outcomes at EOT [g = 0.16, 95% CI (0.05–0.28), p = 0.006], but not at follow-up [g = 0.11, 95% CI (−0.04 to 0.27), p = 0.15]. There was no significant treatment effect on psychological outcomes at either EOT [g = −0.03, 95% CI (−0.14 to 0.08), p = 0.63], or follow-up [g = −0.001, 95% CI (−0.11 to 0.11), p = 0.98]. There was no strong evidence of publication bias or significant moderator effects for illness duration, mean age, year of publication, comparator group category, or risk of bias (all p values > 0.05).

Current specialized treatments are more adept than comparator interventions at imparting change in weight-based AN symptoms at EOT, but not at follow-up. Specialized treatments confer no advantage over comparator interventions in terms of psychological symptoms. Future precision treatment efforts require a specific focus on the psychological symptoms of AN.