The aim of the study was to examine the extent to which obese people differ in their emotionally driven and addictive-like eating behaviors from normal-weight and overweight people. A total of 1142 participants were recruited from a general population, by a web-based cross-sectional survey assessing anxiety/depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), emotional eating (Emotional Appetite Questionnaire), food addiction (modified Yale Food Addiction Scale), and intuitive eating (Intuitive Eating Scale-2). The statistical design was based on analyses of (co)variance, correlograms, and mediations. A set of Body Mass Index (BMI) group comparisons showed that obese people reported higher levels of depression and emotional eating and that they experienced more severe and frequent food addiction symptoms than overweight and normal-weight people. Associations between anxiety, depression, food addiction symptoms’ count, and the difficulties to rely on hunger and satiety cues were found across all weight classes, suggesting that addictive-like eating may represent a unique phenotype of problematic eating behavior that is not synonymous with high BMI or obesity. Conversely, the interrelation between anxiety/depression, emotional eating, and the difficulties to rely on hunger and satiety cues was found only among obese participants, and negative emotional eating mediated the association between depression and anxiety and the difficulties to rely on hunger and satiety cues. This study emphasizes the necessity to develop more comprehensive approaches integrating emotional dysregulation and addictive-like eating behaviors to improve weight management and quality of life of obese people.

Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a serious psychiatric illness that begins most of the time during adolescence. An early and efficacious intervention is crucial to minimize the risk of the illness becoming chronic and to limit the occurrence of comorbidities. There is a global consensus on optimal treatment for adolescents suffering from AN: international guidelines recommend single-family therapy that involves the patient and his/her family. Several family therapy approaches have been developed to date. However, these approaches, which imply a direct questioning of intrafamilial dynamics, are not suitable for all patients and families, and the rates of dropout or poor response to treatment remain quite high. A modality of family therapy has been adapted to AN, known as multi-family therapy (MFT), which consists in bringing together several families whose children suffers from the same illness. Objectives of the present randomized clinical trial are to evaluate whether the implementation of MFT in a multi-disciplinary treatment program for adolescents with AN is at least as efficacious as the use of systemic single-family therapy (SFT), with respect to the evolution of body mass index and other clinical outcomes 12 and 18 months after the start of treatment. A cost-efficiency analysis will also be conducted. One hundred fifty patients meeting the inclusion criteria will be randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups. Patients and their families will receive 10 sessions of therapy spread over 12 months. Body weight, eating disorder and other psychopathology-related symptoms, quality of family relationships, and family satisfaction with treatment will be evaluated during the treatment and at an 18 months follow-up. A cost-efficiency analysis will also be carried out. We hypothesize that MFT is at least as efficacious as SFT, but at a lesser cost. The identification of possible preferential indications for each technique could help the improvement of therapeutic indications for adolescents suffering from AN and contribute to the earliness of intervention, which is associated with a better outcome. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03350594 . Registered on 22 November 2017. IDRCB number 2016-A00818-43.

Objective: The Trait Meta-Mood Scale (TMMS), a 30-item self-assessment questionnaire, has been developed to measure perceived emotional intelligence (EI) level in 3 dimensions: Attention, Clarity and Repair. This study aimed to explore the psychometric properties of the French version of this instrument. Method: The instrument factor structure, normality, internal consistency, stability and concurrent validity were assessed in a sample of 824 young adults (456 female). Besides TMMS, participants completed self-assessment questionnaires for affectivity (Shortened Beck Depression Inventory, State and Trait Anxiety Inventory, Positive and Negative emotion scale), alexithymia (Bermond-Vorst Alexithymia Questionnaire-B) and interpersonal functioning (Empathy Quotient). Discriminant validity was tested in 64 female patients with anorexia nervosa, identified in literature as having difficulties with introspection, expression and emotional regulation. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis results replicate the 3-factor structure. Internal consistency and reliability indices are adequate. Direction and degree of correlation coefficients between TMMS dimensions and other questionnaires support the instrument concurrent validity. TMMS allows to highlight differences in perceived EI levels between men and women (Attention: p < 0.001 ; Clarity: p < 0.05) as well as between patients with anorexia nervosa and control subjects (p < 0.001 for all 3 dimensions). Conclusion: This first validation study shows satisfying psychometric properties for TMMS French version.

Antidepressants are often considered to be mere placebos despite the fact that meta-analyses are able to rank them. It follows that it should also be possible to rank different placebos, which are all made of sucrose. To explore this issue, which is rather more epistemological than clinical, we designed an unusual meta-analysis to investigate whether the effects of placebo in one situation are different from the effects of placebo in another situation. Published and unpublished studies were searched for by three reviewers on Medline, the Cochrane Library, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, Current Controlled Trial, in bibliographies, and by mailing key organizations. The following studies in first-line treatment for major depressive disorder were considered to construct an “evidence network”: 1) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) versus placebo on fluoxetine, venlafaxine and 2) fluoxetine versus venlafaxine head-to-head RCTs. Two network meta-analyses were run to indirectly compare response and remission rates among three different placebos: 1) fluoxetine placebo, 2) venlafaxine placebo, and 3) venlafaxine/fluoxetine placebo (that is, placebo compared to both venlafaxine and fluoxetine). Publication biases were assessed using funnel plots and statistically tested. The three placebos were not significantly different in terms of response or remission. The antidepressant agents were significantly more efficacious than the placebos, and venlafaxine was more efficacious than fluoxetine. The funnel plots, however, showed a major publication bias. The presence of significant levels of publication bias indicates that we cannot even be certain of the conclusion that sucrose equals sucrose in trials of major depressive disorder. This result should remind clinicians to step back to take a more objective view when interpreting a scientific result. It is of crucial importance for their practice, far more so than ranking antidepressant efficacy.

Introduction: People diagnosed with Anorexia Nervosa (AN) are at risk for poor cognitive flexibility and excessive attention to detail. These difficulties are traditionally quantified using neuropsychological tests. These tests do not capture the subjective repercussions of these cognitive styles. The Detail and Flexibility Questionnaire (DFlex) has been specifically developed to measure these repercussions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the French version of this scale (F-DFlex) and to adapt it if needed. Methods: The instrument factor structure, internal consistency, convergent, and discriminant validity were assessed in a sample of 107 French women AN inpatients. For convergent validity, associations between F-DFlex scores, perceived levels of autistic traits (Autism Quotient questionnaire – AQ) and eating disorders symptomatology (Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire – EDE-Q), as well as neuropsychological evaluations (Wisconsin Card Sorting Test – WCST, Rey Complex Figure – RCF) were tested. Discriminant validity was assessed by comparing F-DFlex scores of the patients with a chronic versus non-chronic illness. Results: The results of the exploratory factorial analysis led to the removal of four items. Internal consistency indices of this shortened version were good. Correlation coefficients directions and values between F-DFlex factors and relevant AQ Switching and Detail subscores were satisfactory, indicating good convergent validity. F-DFlex Rigidity scores were associated with the WCST percentage of perseverative errors, but the F-DFlex Attention to Detail scores were not associated with the RCF central coherence index. F-DFlex scores were associated with the severity of eating disorders symptomatology independently of BMI, illness duration, or anxiety, and depression. Conclusion: This study indicates good psychometric properties of this new version of the DFlex. The F-DFlex appears as a promising self-report screening tool of important cognitive dimensions for use in clinical management of people diagnosed with AN.