ArticleCureus2022
Emergency Department Utilization by Patients With Eating Disorders: A National Population-Based Study.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in anorexia and bulimia nervosa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of general psychiatry · 2026Review
- Demographics, psychiatric comorbidities, and hospital outcomes across eating disorder types in adolescents and youth: insights from US hospitals data.Frontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry · 2024Article
- Evaluation of an online modular eating disorders training (PreparED) to prepare healthcare trainees: a survey study.BMC medical education · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background There is a scarcity of national United States (U.S) data on emergency department (ED) utilization by patients with eating disorders. This study aims to determine the most common reasons for ED visits of patients with eating disorders, as well as baseline characteristics of patients who present due to eating disorders. Methods We obtained data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS), the largest all-payer ED database in the United States. Each ED visit in NEDS 2018 can have only one "principal" diagnosis, which is the main reason for the visit and up to 34 "secondary" diagnoses. We abstracted data for all ED visits with "any" diagnosis of an eating disorder, using the ICD-10 code "F50". We highlighted the 10 most common "principal" diagnoses based on the organ system involved and the 10 most specific "principal" diagnoses for all ED visits by patients with any diagnosis of eating disorder. We then highlighted baseline characteristics of ED visits with a "principal" diagnosis of an eating disorder. Results There were a total of 56,901 ED visits for patients with eating disorders in 2018. Among these, 7,979 had an eating disorder as the "principal" diagnosis. Patients who visited the ED principally for eating disorders were more likely to be young females and came from higher-income households; about a third were admitted with 22.1 million U.S. dollars in aggregate ED charges. Mental disorders, and injuries and poisoning were the most common principal diagnosis by organ system categories, while eating disorders, major depression disorder (MDD), hypokalemia, and dehydration are common specific reasons for ED visits among patients with eating disorders. Conclusions Eating disorders, and its medical complications and psychiatric comorbidities such as MDD are common reasons for ED visits among patients with eating disorders. Management of the underlying eating disorder and their psychiatric comorbidities through a multidisciplinary approach in the outpatient setting is invaluable in reducing ED utilization by these patients.
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.