The research-practice Gap: Bridging the schism between eating disorder researchers and practitioners

• Published in: The International journal of eating disorders Vol. 46; no. 5; pp. 386 - 394
• Main Authors: Lilienfeld, Scott O., Ritschel, Lorie A., Lynn, Steven Jay, Brown, Amanda P., Cautin, Robin L., Latzman, Robert D.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hoboken Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company 01.07.2013; Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
• Subjects: confirmation bias; Eating disorders; Evidence-based medicine; Evidence-Based Practice; Feeding and Eating Disorders - therapy; Health Personnel; Humans; Medical treatment; naive realism; Placebo effect; randomized controlled trial; Research Design; Research Personnel; research-practice gap
• ISSN: 0276-3478; 1098-108X
• DOI: 10.1002/eat.22090

Objective: The field of eating disorders (EDs) treatment has been beset by a marked disjunction between scientific evidence and clinical application. We describe the nature and scope of the research–practice gap in the ED field. Method: We draw on surveys and broader literature to better understand the research–practice gap in ED treatment and reasons for resistance to evidence‐based practice. Results: We identify three sources of the research–practice gap: (1) attitudinal factors, (2) differences in the definition of “evidence,” and (3) cognitive factors, especially naïve realism and confirmation bias. We affirm the role of science as a safeguard against human fallibility and as a means of bridging the research–practice gap, and delineate key principles of scientific thinking for ED researchers and practitioners. Discussion: We conclude with proposals for narrowing the research–practice gap in ED treatment and enhancing the quality of interventions for ED clients. © 2013 by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (Int J Eat Disord 2013; 46:386–394)