Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35856250›Full record

ArticleBJPsych open2022

Transitions from intensive eating disorder treatment settings: qualitative investigation of the experiences and needs of adults with anorexia nervosa and their carers.

Danielle Clark Bryan, Pamela Macdonald, Valentina Cardi, Katie Rowlands, Suman Ambwani, Jon Arcelus, Eva-Maria Bonin, Sabine Landau, Ulrike Schmidt, Janet Treasure

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Patient and carer feedback and engagement with ECHOMANTRA, a digital guided intervention for anorexia nervosa.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Danielle Clark BryanDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6422-7306
Pamela MacdonaldDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5182-0979
Valentina CardiDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7763-7099
Katie RowlandsDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9671-4344
Suman AmbwaniDepartment of Psychology, Dickinson College, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7975-1971
Jon ArcelusInstitute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3805-0180
Eva-Maria BoninCare Policy and Evaluation Centre, Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9123-9217
Sabine LandauDepartment of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, King's College London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3615-8075
Ulrike SchmidtDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1335-1937
Janet TreasureDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0871-4596
King's College London · GBDickinson College · USLondon School of Economics and Political Science · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

Health Technology Assessment Programme 14/68/09
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRelapse rates for individuals with anorexia nervosa after intensive hospital treatment (in-patient or full-time day care) are high. Better knowledge about the difficulties and opportunities that arise during this transition is needed to identify factors that support or hinder continued recovery upon discharge.

aimsThe aim of this study was to explore the experiences of adult patients and their chosen carers on the process of transitioning from intensive eating disorder treatment settings to the community.

methodSemi-structured interviews were conducted with patients with anorexia nervosa (

resultsFour interrelated themes were identified for both groups. For patients, themes were continuity of care, ambivalence about continued recovery, the value of social support and a call for enhanced transition support. For carers, themes were the impact of the eating disorder on themselves and the family, perceptions of recovery and support post-discharge, the impact of previous treatment and care experiences, and desire to create a supportive transition process.

conclusionsThe study provides an insight into the unique challenges that individuals with anorexia nervosa face upon leaving intensive treatment. A lack of post-discharge planning, support system and identity formation outside of anorexia nervosa were perceived as barriers to continued recovery. Patients and carers advocated for transition support that incorporates a phased, inclusive approach with accessible professional and social support in the community.

Indexed as

Anorexia nervosacarerseating disordersin-patient treatmentout-patient treatment

Identifiers

PMID35856250
PMCPMC9347315
OpenAlexW4286210853

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.