Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29201365›Full record

ArticleJournal of eating disorders2017

Development of guidelines for giving community presentations about eating disorders: a Delphi study.

Joanna Rachel Doley, Laura Merilyn Hart, Arthur Anthony Stukas, Amy Joanna Morgan, Danielle Lisa Rowlands, Susan Jessica Paxton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of eating disorders, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

6 authors.

Joanna Rachel DoleyLa Trobe University, Melbourne Campus, Melbourne, Australia.
Laura Merilyn HartLa Trobe University, Melbourne Campus, Melbourne, Australia.
Arthur Anthony StukasLa Trobe University, Melbourne Campus, Melbourne, Australia.
Amy Joanna MorganLa Trobe University, Melbourne Campus, Melbourne, Australia.
Danielle Lisa RowlandsThe Butterfly Foundation, Glen Iris, Australia.
Susan Jessica PaxtonLa Trobe University, Melbourne Campus, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConcerns exist around how to talk about eating disorders (EDs) due to evidence that suggests discussing ED symptoms and behaviours may cause or worsen symptoms in vulnerable people. Using expert consensus, we developed a set of guidelines for giving safe community presentations about EDs.

methodsParticipants with professional ED expertise, and people with lived experience of an ED, were recruited for a Delphi study.

results208 statements were endorsed by the panel over three rounds. 13 statements were strongly endorsed in the first round, with both people with lived experience and professionals agreeing it is important for presentations to include information on etiology of EDs and to promote help-seeking. Several statements had a high level of disagreement between those with lived experience and professionals, including the idea that presentations should suggest dieting is likely to result in weight gain. DISCUSSION: The experts were able to develop consensus on a wide range of issues. Panel members, particularly people with lived experience, were sensitive to aspects of presentations that may be harmful to an audience. The guidelines fill an important gap in the literature and provide guidance to those educating the public about EDs; they should, however, be further evaluated to test their efficacy.

Indexed as

Consumer advocacyDelphi techniqueEating disordersMental health literacySocial stigma

Identifiers

PMID29201365
PMCPMC5697432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.