SynthesisEating and weight disorders : EWD2021
Compulsory treatments in eating disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Eating and weight disorders : EWD, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychiatric and somatic morbidity patterns among patients diagnosed with anorexia nervosa and the risk of involuntary treatment: register-based cohort study.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2026Article
- Clinicians' Experiences of Providing Compulsory Care for Youth With Anorexia Nervosa: A Qualitative Study.The International journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Development of a calorie-based weight prediction equation for Anorexia nervosa: a case report.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Finding the balance between respecting autonomy and life-saving anorexia nervosa care: an Australian perspective.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2026Article
- More pressure, more release? When compulsory care fails: an autonomy-supportive treatment policy as an alternative to failed compulsory care in inpatient care for youth with anorexia nervosa.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- What does taking olanzapine mean to young people with anorexia nervosa and their families? Findings from the OPEN feasibility trial.Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- Knowledge and attitudes of Dutch psychiatry residents towards anorexia nervosa.Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- "Holding the line"-relationship building and challenges when nursing adults with a severe eating disorder.Journal of eating disorders · 2024Article
- Clinical, legal and ethical implications of coercion and compulsory treatment in eating disorders: do rapid review findings identify clear answers or more muddy waters?Journal of eating disorders · 2024Review
- Harm reduction in severe and long-standing Anorexia Nervosa: part of the journey but not the destination-a narrative review with lived experience.Journal of eating disorders · 2024Review
- Involuntary Treatment for Child and Adolescent Anorexia Nervosa-A Narrative Review and Possible Advances to Move Away from Coercion.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Prevalence and correlates of restrictive interventions in an Irish child and adolescent psychiatric unit: a 4-year retrospective study.Irish journal of medical science · 2023Article
- Anorexia nervosa through the lens of primary health care practitioners in the Kyrgyz Republic.Consortium psychiatricum · 2023Article
- A systematic review of people's lived experiences of inpatient treatment for anorexia nervosa: living in a "bubble".Journal of eating disorders · 2023Article
- Involuntary treatment in patients with anorexia nervosa: utilization patterns and associated factors.Psychological medicine · 2023Article
- Living and leaving a life of coercion: a qualitative interview study of patients with anorexia nervosa and multiple involuntary treatment events.Journal of eating disorders · 2023Article
- Influence of eating disorder psychopathology and general psychopathology on the risk of involuntary treatment in anorexia nervosa.Eating and weight disorders : EWD · 2022Article
- Models of care for eating disorders: findings from a rapid review.Journal of eating disorders · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis are to provide a summary of the current literature concerning compulsory treatments in patients with eating disorders (ED) and to understand whether compulsorily and involuntarily treated patients differ in terms of baseline characteristics and treatment outcomes.
methodsRelevant articles were identified following the PRISMA guidelines by searching the following terms: "treatment refusal", "forced feeding", "compulsory/coercive/involuntary/forced treatment/admission", "eating disorders", "feeding and eating disorders", "anorexia nervosa", "bulimia nervosa". Research was restricted to articles concerning humans and published between 1975 and 2020 in English.
resultsOut of 905 articles retrieved, nine were included for the analyses allowing the comparisons between 242 compulsorily and 738 voluntarily treated patients. Mean body mass index (BMI) was slightly lower in patients compelled to treatments. Mean illness duration, BMI at discharge and BMI variation showed no significant differences between the two groups. Average length of hospitalization was 3 weeks longer among compulsory-treated patients, but this did not result in a higher increase in BMI. No significant risk difference on mortality was estimated (three studies).
conclusionsCompulsory treatments are usually intended for patients having worse baseline conditions than voluntary ones. Those patients are unlikely to engage in treatments without being compelled but, after the treatments, albeit with longer hospitalisations, they do achieve similar outcomes. Therefore, we can conclude that forcing patients to treatment is a conceivable option. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, systematic review and meta-analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.