Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35906929›Full record

Trial reportThe International journal of eating disorders2022

Effectiveness of an online self-help program, expert-patient support, and their combination for eating disorders: Results from a randomized controlled trial.

Pieter J Rohrbach, Alexandra E Dingemans, Philip Spinhoven, Joost R Van Ginkel, Marjolein Fokkema, Tom F Wilderjans, Stephanie Bauer, Eric F Van Furth

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The International journal of eating disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Design, Implement, Sustain: Advancing Program-Led Interventions for Binge Eating, a Narrative Review.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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 at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Pieter J RohrbachGGZ Rivierduinen Eating Disorders Ursula, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0795-466X
Alexandra E DingemansGGZ Rivierduinen Eating Disorders Ursula, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5499-7139
Philip SpinhovenDepartment of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.
Joost R Van GinkelMethodology and Statistics Research Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands.
Marjolein FokkemaMethodology and Statistics Research Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands.
Tom F WilderjansMethodology and Statistics Research Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands.
Stephanie BauerCenter for Psychotherapy Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Germany.
Eric F Van FurthGGZ Rivierduinen Eating Disorders Ursula, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1131-0886
Leiden University · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLGGZ Rivierduinen · NLHeidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMany individuals with an eating disorder do not receive appropriate care. Low-threshold interventions could help bridge this treatment gap. The study aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of Featback, a fully automated online self-help intervention, online expert-patient support and their combination.

methodA randomized controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up period was conducted. Participants aged 16 or older with at least mild eating disorder symptoms were randomized to four conditions: (1) Featback, a fully automated online self-help intervention, (2) chat or email support from a recovered expert patient, (3) Featback with expert-patient support and (4) a waiting list control condition. The intervention period was 8 weeks and there was a total of six online assessments. The main outcome constituted reduction of eating disorder symptoms over time.

resultsThree hundred fifty five participants, of whom 43% had never received eating disorder treatment, were randomized. The three active interventions were superior to a waitlist in reducing eating disorder symptoms (d = -0.38), with no significant difference in effectiveness between the three interventions. Participants in conditions with expert-patient support were more satisfied with the intervention. DISCUSSION: Internet-based self-help, expert-patient support and their combination were effective in reducing eating disorder symptoms compared to a waiting list control condition. Guidance improved satisfaction with the internet intervention but not its effectiveness. Low-threshold interventions such as Featback and expert-patient support can reduce eating disorder symptoms and reach the large group of underserved individuals, complementing existing forms of eating disorder treatment. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Individuals with eating-related problems who received (1) a fully automated internet-based intervention, (2) chat and e-mail support by a recovered individual or (3) their combination, experienced stronger reductions in eating disorder symptoms than those who received (4) usual care. Such brief and easy-access interventions play an important role in reaching individuals who are currently not reached by other forms of treatment.

Indexed as

Feeding and Eating DisordersInternet-Based InterventionHealth BehaviorHumansInternetTreatment OutcomeWaiting Listseating disorderseHealthexpert patientinternet-based interventionrandomized controlled trialtreatment gap

Identifiers

PMID35906929
PMCPMC9796760
OpenAlexW4288826004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.