Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34240153›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of public health2021

Stakeholders' perspectives on online interventions to improve mental health in eating disorder patients and carers in Germany.

Juliane Schmidt-Hantke, Bianka Vollert, Franziska Hagner, Ina Beintner, Kristian Hütter, Martina Nitsch, Corinna Jacobi, Karin Waldherr

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors.

Juliane Schmidt-HantkeTU Dresden, Faculty of Psychology, Institute of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Dresden, Germany.
Bianka VollertTU Dresden, Faculty of Psychology, Institute of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Dresden, Germany.
Franziska HagnerTU Dresden, Faculty of Psychology, Institute of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Dresden, Germany.
Ina BeintnerTU Dresden, Faculty of Psychology, Institute of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Dresden, Germany.
Kristian HütterTU Dresden, Faculty of Psychology, Institute of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Dresden, Germany.
Martina NitschFerdinand Porsche FernFH-Distance Learning University of Applied Sciences, Wiener Neustadt, Austria.
Corinna JacobiTU Dresden, Faculty of Psychology, Institute of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Dresden, Germany.
Karin WaldherrFerdinand Porsche FernFH-Distance Learning University of Applied Sciences, Wiener Neustadt, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEating disorders are causing severe consequences for those affected as well as a high burden for their carers. Although there is a substantial need for psychological assistance, different factors are hindering access to support. Internet-based interventions can help to overcome these barriers. To date, there is only little knowledge on attitudes of potential users, facilitators (e.g. psychologists) and decision makers (e.g. health insurances) regarding these interventions.

methodsWe conducted focus groups with potential users (N = 30) and semi-structured interviews with potential decision makers (N = 4). Potential facilitators (N = 41) participated in an online survey. Stakeholders' experiences, attitudes, and their needs regarding Internet-based interventions for eating disorder patients and carers were assessed. Furthermore, hindering and fostering factors related to reach, adoption, implementation and maintenance were analyzed.

resultsAbout two-thirds of the participating facilitators have heard or read about Internet-based interventions in general. In contrast, the other stakeholders mentioned to have no or little experience with such interventions. Factors like anonymity, availability and cost-effectiveness were seen as major advantages. Also disadvantages, e.g. lack of personal contact, limitations by disease severity and concerns on data safety, were mentioned. Stakeholders stated the need for interventions which are usable, evidence-based, tailored and provide personal support.

conclusionStakeholders considered Internet-based programmes to have more advantages than disadvantages. Effort should be put in providing systematic education to address prejudices. When offering an online intervention, stakeholders' needs, as well as a continuous evaluation and adaptation, have to be taken into account.

Indexed as

Feeding and Eating DisordersInternet-Based InterventionCaregiversFocus GroupsHumansMental Health

Identifiers

PMID34240153
PMCPMC8266537

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.