ReviewEating and weight disorders : EWD2014
The diagnostic classification of eating disorders: current situation, possible alternatives and future perspectives.
Review in Eating and weight disorders : EWD, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Equity in eating disorders: a dialectical approach to stigma, expertise, and the coproduction of knowledge.Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- A retrospective study of the impact of DSM-5 on the diagnosis of eating disorders in Victoria, Australia.Journal of eating disorders · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current nosography of eating disorders (ED) has various limitations in terms of validity and accuracy. The changes adopted in the DSM-5 limit some of the current problems, such as excessive prevalence of ED not otherwise specified (EDNOS) and the lack of longitudinal stability, but are unlikely to adequately capture the clinical complexity of ED. Many authors suggest the need for a thorough review of the current nosography to support evidence-based classification. In this paper, we discuss the validity of the current diagnostic categories and their possible reorganization. Furthermore, we review the main empirical models of classification and the diagnostic approach from a personality perspective, with particular attention to research and to the prognostic and therapeutic implications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24104389What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.