Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35864298›Full record

ArticleEating and weight disorders : EWD2022

Influence of eating disorder psychopathology and general psychopathology on the risk of involuntary treatment in anorexia nervosa.

Benjamin Mac Donald, Cynthia M Bulik, Liselotte V Petersen, Loa Clausen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Eating and weight disorders : EWD, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

4 authors.

Benjamin Mac DonaldDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. zychologist@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7901-3642
Cynthia M BulikDepartment of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7772-3264
Liselotte V Petersen *The National Centre for Register-Based Research, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0479-5379
Loa Clausen *Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4559-8347

Funding

Eating Disorders Genetics Initiative (EDGI)R01MH120170 · NIMH · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BULIK, CYNTHIA M · 2019 to 2023
$7.2M
Predicting the multi-omic impact of psychiatric GWAS associationsR01MH118278 · NIMH · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI HUCKINS, LAURA MARIANNE · 2019 to 2023
$3.6M
1/7 PGC: Advancing Discovery and ImpactR01MH124871 · NIMH · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BULIK, CYNTHIA M, SULLIVAN, PATRICK F · 2021 to 2025
$3.5M
Predicting Binge and Purge Episodes from Passive and Active Apple Watch Data Using a Dynamical Systems ApproachR01MH119084 · NIMH · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BULIK, CYNTHIA M, BUTNER, JONATHAN · 2019 to 2022
$2.8M
Lundbeckfonden R276-2018-4581NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH118278NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH119084NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH120170NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH124871Swedish Research Council Vetenskapsrådet 538-2013-8864The National Institute of Mental Health R01MH118278The National Institute of Mental Health R01MH119084The National Institute of Mental Health R01MH120170The National Institute of Mental Health R01MH124871The National Institutes of Health R01MH120170
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe explored associations between clinical factors, including eating disorder psychopathology and more general psychopathology, and involuntary treatment in patients with anorexia nervosa. Our intention was to inform identification of patients at risk of involuntary treatment.

methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study combining clinical data from a specialized eating disorder hospital unit in Denmark with nationwide Danish register-based data. A sequential methodology yielding two samples (212 and 278 patients, respectively) was adopted. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were used to explore associations between involuntary treatment and clinical factors including previous involuntary treatment, patient cooperation, and symptom-level psychopathology (Eating Disorder Inventory-2 (EDI-2) and Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R)).

resultsSomatization (SCL-90-R) (OR = 2.60, 95% CI 1.16-5.81) and phobic anxiety (SCL-90-R) (OR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.19-0.97) were positively and negatively, respectively, associated with the likelihood of involuntary treatment. Furthermore, somatization (HR = 1.77, 95% CI 1.05-2.99), previous involuntary treatment (HR = 5.0, 95% CI 2.68-9.32), and neutral (HR = 2.92, 95% CI 1.20-7.13) or poor (HR = 3.97, 95% CI 1.49-10.59) patient cooperation were associated with decreased time to involuntary treatment. Eating disorder psychopathology measured by the EDI-2 was not significantly associated with involuntary treatment.

conclusionsClinical questionnaires of psychopathology appear to capture specific domains relevant to involuntary treatment. Poor patient cooperation and previous involuntary treatment being associated with shorter time to involuntary treatment raise important clinical issues requiring attention. Novel approaches to acute anorexia nervosa care along with unbiased evaluation upon readmission could mitigate the cycle of repeat admissions with involuntary treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, cohort study.

Indexed as

Anorexia NervosaFeeding and Eating DisordersInvoluntary TreatmentCohort StudiesHumansPsychopathologyRetrospective StudiesAnorexia nervosaCoercionCompulsory treatmentEating disordersEpidemiological factorsInvoluntary treatmentPsychopathology

Identifiers

PMID35864298
PMCPMC9805523

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.