Natural recovery from trichotillomania

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Absence of comorbid panic disorder, skin picking disorder, and tic disorder were each independently and significantly associated with natural recovery from trichotillomania after controlling for age:

Effect: improvement; Panic: 22.22% vs 40.57% (p = 0.0268); Skin picking: 17.46% vs 34.29% (p = 0.0315); Tic: 3.17% vs 16% (p = 0.0362)

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267

Lower rates of anxiety disorder (63.49% vs 76.57%, p = 0.0489), bipolar disorder (14.29% vs 26.29%, p = 0.0445), and eating disorder (20.63% vs 34.86%, p = 0.0319) were observed in those with natural

Effect: null; Anxiety: age-adjusted p = 0.1258; Bipolar: age-adjusted p = 0.1309; Eating: age-adjusted p = 0.1267