Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28777107›Full record

SynthesisCurrent opinion in psychiatry2017

Evidence-based clinical guidelines for eating disorders: international comparison.

Anja Hilbert, Hans W Hoek, Ricarda Schmidt

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current opinion in psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 155 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
155citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
25.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

155 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 359 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

95 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Anja HilbertaDepartment of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany bParnassia Psychiatric Institute, The Hague cDepartment of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands dDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University, Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York, USA.
Hans W Hoek
Ricarda Schmidt
GTx (United States) · USLeipzig University · DEParnassia Groep · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe current systematic review sought to compare available evidence-based clinical treatment guidelines for all specific eating disorders. RECENT

findingsNine evidence-based clinical treatment guidelines for eating disorders were located through a systematic search. The international comparison demonstrated notable commonalities and differences among these current clinical guidelines. SUMMARY: Evidence-based clinical guidelines represent an important step toward the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based treatments into clinical practice. Despite advances in clinical research on eating disorders, a growing body of literature demonstrates that individuals with eating disorders often do not receive an evidence-based treatment for their disorder. Regarding the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based treatments, current guidelines do endorse the main empirically validated treatment approaches with considerable agreement, but additional recommendations are largely inconsistent. An increased evidence base is critical in offering clinically useful and reliable guidance for the treatment of eating disorders. Because developing and updating clinical guidelines is time-consuming and complex, an international coordination of guideline development, for example, across the European Union, would be desirable.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineFeeding and Eating DisordersHumansInternationalityPractice Guidelines as Topic

Identifiers

PMID28777107
PMCPMC5690314
OpenAlexW2742943332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.