Adolescent female athletes in aesthetic sports disciplines (such as rhythmic gymnastics, artistic gymnastics, synchronized swimming, and figure skating) face a complex interaction between general sociocultural beauty pressures and sport-specific aesthetic demands (e.g., the 'slim to win' culture and weight-focused performance expectations). These combined pressures significantly increase their risk of developing body dissatisfaction and eating disorders (EDs). To address these systemic vulnerabilities, the HADAS Program (Habits, Eating, Sports, Adolescents, and Health) was developed as a multi-level, synchronized psychoeducational intervention designed to target the complete "sports triangle": adolescent female athletes, their technical coaches, and their immediate family members. The primary objective of this cluster randomized controlled trial (cluster RCT) is to evaluate the efficacy of the HADAS Program in reducing eating disorder risk (EAT-26) and body image dissatisfaction (BSQ-34) among competitive adolescent female athletes aged 12 to 16 years. Sports clubs are randomly assigned to either the Experimental Group (receiving the HADAS intervention) or a Waitlist Control Group (maintaining standard training). The program includes 5 interactive group sessions for athletes, 4 reflective workshops for coaches, and 2 structured sessions for family members, all supported by cohort-specific workbooks. Outcomes are evaluated across four longitudinal time points: Baseline (T0), Immediate Post-intervention (T1), 6-month Follow-up (T2), and 12-month Follow-up (T3).
Athletes: Female gender; aged between 12 and 16 years old; actively possessing a formal federation license in an aesthetic sport discipline (e.g., rhythmic gymnastics, artistic gymnastics, synchronized swimming, figure skating) within Spain; providing signed informed assent concurrently with written informed consent from parents/legal representatives; and presenting no active, formal clinical diagnosis of an eating disorder (ED).
Coaches: Serving as a primary trainer or technical staff member within the participating sports club; and providing written informed consent.
Family Members: Operating as the primary parent, guardian, or legal representative of an included athlete; and providing written informed consent.
Athletes: Presenting a current, formal clinical diagnosis of an eating disorder (e.g., Anorexia Nervosa, Bulimia Nervosa, Binge Eating Disorder, or ARFID) at baseline (T0); or refusal to provide informed assent or parental consent.
Non-compliance or failure to provide signed informed consent from coaches or primary legal guardians.
Parallel
The HADAS Program
BehavioralA synchronized, multi-level psychoeducational prevention program designed to target eating disorder risk and body image dissatisfaction across the sports triangle (athletes, coaches, and families). Content focuses on media literacy, healthy life habits, emotional management, deconstructing body-weight myths in aesthetic sports, and promoting autonomy-supportive coaching and family environments
Eating Disorder Risk and Symptomatology
Evaluated using the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-26; Garner et al., 1982; Spanish validation by Rivas et al., 2010). It assesses eating disorder risk behaviors and attitudes across 26 items. Total scores range from 0 to 78, where higher scores indicate greater eating disorder risk and symptomatology (a worse outcome) . Scores of 20 or higher indicate the presence of significant risk attitudes toward eating.
Body Image Dissatisfaction
Evaluated using the Body Shape Questionnaire (BSQ-34; Cooper et al., 1987; Spanish validation by Raich et al., 1996). It assesses body dissatisfaction and concern with weight and shape across 34 items. Total scores range from 34 to 204, where higher scores indicate greater body dissatisfaction and psychological distress regarding body image (a worse outcome). Scores are categorized into no dissatisfaction (\<80), mild (80-110), moderate (111-140), and severe (\>140), with moderate and severe categories indicating significant body image vulnerability.
Psychological Well-Being
Evaluated using the Psychological Well-Being Scale for Youth (PWB-SF-Y; Ryff, 1989; Spanish adaptation by Stavraki et al., 2022). It assesses well-being across 6 core dimensions using a single item per dimension. Items are rated on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 6 ("strongly agree"). Total scores range from 6 to 36, where higher scores indicate greater psychological well-being and optimal psychological functioning (a better outcome)..
Life Satisfaction
Evaluated using the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS; Diener et al., 1985; Spanish validation in adolescents by Atienza et al., 2003). It assesses global cognitive judgments of one's life satisfaction across 5 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree"). Total scores range from 5 to 25, where higher scores indicate greater life satisfaction and positive cognitive evaluation of life (a better outcome).
Competitive Anxiety
Evaluated using the Revised Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2R; Martens et al., 1990; Spanish validation by Andrade et al., 2007). It assesses pre-competitive state anxiety across 16 items rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("not at all") to 4 ("very much"). The inventory measures three subscales: Cognitive Anxiety (5 items; scores range from 5 to 20, where higher scores indicate higher cognitive anxiety / a worse outcome), Somatic Anxiety (6 items; scores range from 6 to 24, where higher scores indicate higher somatic anxiety / a worse outcome), and Self-Confidence (5 items; scores range from 5 to 20, where higher scores indicate greater self-confidence / a better outcome).
Perfectionism in sports
Evaluated using the Multidimensional Inventory of Perfectionism in Sport (MIPS; Stoeber et al., 2006; Spanish validation by Ramírez-Muñoz et al., 2023). It assesses sport-specific perfectionism across 10 items rated on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("never") to 6 ("always"). The inventory yields two distinct subscales (5 items each, with total scores ranging from 5 to 30 for each subscale): Striving for Perfection (evaluates personal standards of excellence) and Negative Reactions to Imperfection (evaluates negative reactions to mistakes and sensitivity to external pressure), where higher scores reflect greater maladaptive perfectionism and a worse outcome).
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.
This trial is not recruiting at the moment. You can still explore other options:
