Interpersonal Difficulty, Affective Problems, and Ineffectiveness as Predictors of Eating Disordered Attitudes and Behavior

The goal of this study was to better understand the relationships between psychological variables (i.e., interpersonal problems, affective problems, and ineffectiveness) and factors (i.e., previous hospitalizations, self-harm, and length of stay) related to disordered eating. A set of psychological variables and ED-related symptoms from the EDI-3 were examined within an inpatient eating disorder treatment center. Data were analyzed from an existing dataset consisting of 1,331 female participants, ranging in age from 14-65. Multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to test the hypothesis that the independent variables would predict ED-related symptoms (i.e., bulimia, body dissatisfaction, and drive for thinness). Regression models for bulimia and body dissatisfaction were significant, however, the regression model explained only 5% of the variance in bulimia and only 1% of the variance in body dissatisfaction. The regression model was not significant for drive for thinness. There were also findings that were inconsistent with the hypotheses. Though the research demonstrated a relationship between affective problems with bulimia and body dissatisfaction, the results demonstrated weak and inverse relationships between them (as affective problems increased, bulimia and body dissatisfaction decreased and as affective problems decreased, bulimia and body dissatisfaction increased). Based on these results, future research is necessary to better understand these relationships and to determine other potential predictors and risk factors of eating pathology

Quality of life of adolescents with cancer: family risks and resources

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the relative contribution of treatment intensity, family sociodemographic risk, and family resources to health-related quality of life (QOL) of 102 adolescents in treatment for cancer. METHODS: Adolescents and parents completed self-report measures of teen QOL, family functioning, and parent-child bonding. Based on parent report of family sociodemographic variables, an additive risk index was computed. A pediatric oncologist rated treatment intensity. RESULTS: Simultaneous regression analyses demonstrated the significant contribution of roles in family functioning and quality of parent-child relationship to prediction of psychosocial QOL (parent and teen-reported) as well as parent-reported teen physical QOL over and above the contribution of treatment intensity. Family sociodemographic risk did not contribute to QOL in these regression analyses. In additional analyses, specific diagnosis, types of treatment and individual sociodemographic risk variables were not associated with QOL. Parent and teen ratings of family functioning and quality of life were concordant. CONCLUSIONS: Family functioning, including quality of parent-child relationship, are central and potentially modifiable resistance factors in teen QOL while under treatment for cancer. Even more important than relying on diagnosis or treatment, screening for roles and relationships early in treatment may be an important aspect of determining risk for poor QOL outcomes