Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36380363›Full record

ReviewJournal of eating disorders2022

Models of care for eating disorders: findings from a rapid review.

Melissa J Pehlivan, Jane Miskovic-Wheatley, Anvi Le, Danielle Maloney, National Eating Disorders Research Consortium, Stephen Touyz, Sarah Maguire

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in 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 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Clinician Practices in Determining Expected Body Weights Across Eating Disorders: A Mixed Methods Study.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Healthcare utilization for eating disorders in Australia: 10 years of health data linkage.The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Melissa J PehlivanInsideOut Institute for Eating Disorders, University of Sydney, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia. melissa.pehlivan@sydney.edu.au.
Jane Miskovic-WheatleyInsideOut Institute for Eating Disorders, University of Sydney, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.
Anvi LeHealthcare Management Advisors, Melbourne, Australia.
Danielle MaloneyInsideOut Institute for Eating Disorders, University of Sydney, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.
National Eating Disorders Research ConsortiumInsideOut Institute for Eating Disorders, University of Sydney, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.
Stephen TouyzInsideOut Institute for Eating Disorders, University of Sydney, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.
Sarah MaguireInsideOut Institute for Eating Disorders, University of Sydney, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDelayed diagnosis, gaps in services and subsequent delays in specialist care and treatment lead to poorer health outcomes for individuals with eating disorders (EDs) and drive significant government healthcare expenditure. Given the significant disease burden associated with EDs, it is imperative that current implementation research is summarised to identify gaps in care and enable refinement for optimal patient outcomes. This review aimed to provide an updated synthesis on models of care for EDs in developed healthcare systems.

methodsThis paper was conducted as part of a series of Rapid Reviews (RRs) to be published in a special series in the Journal of Eating Disorders. To provide a current and rigorous review, peer-reviewed articles published in the English language between 2009 and 2021 across three databases (ScienceDirect, PubMed and Ovid/Medline) were searched, with priority given to higher level evidence (e.g., meta-analyses, large population studies, Randomised Control Trials (RCTs)). The current review synthesises data from included studies investigating models of care for people with EDs.

resultsSixty-three studies (4.5% of the original RR) were identified, which included several diagnostic populations, the most common being Anorexia Nervosa (AN) (30.51%). Across EDs, specialist care was found to improve patient outcomes, with many patients effectively being treated in outpatient or day programs with multi-disciplinary teams, without the need for lengthy inpatient hospitalisation. Few studies investigated the interaction of different ED services (e.g., inpatient, community services, primary care), however stepped care models emerged as a promising approach to integrate ED services in a targeted and cost-effective way. Issues surrounding low treatment uptake, underdiagnosis, long waiting lists and limited hospital beds were also evident across services.

conclusionFindings suggested further research into alternatives to traditional inpatient care is needed, with partial and shorter 'hospitalisations' emerging as promising avenues. Additionally, to tackle ongoing resource issues and ensure timely detection and treatment of EDs, further research into novel alternatives, such as active waiting lists or a greater role for primary care clinicians is needed. This paper is part of a larger Rapid Review series carried out to guide Australia's National Eating Disorders Research and Translation Strategy 2021-2031. Rapid reviews aim to thoroughly summarise an area of research over a short time period, typically to help with policymaking in this area. This Rapid Review summarises the evidence relating to how we care for people with eating disorders in Western healthcare systems. Topics covered include inpatient/hospital care, residential care, day programs, outpatient/community care, and referral pathways. Findings suggested specialist eating disorder services may enhance detection, referral, and patient care. Stepped care models presented as a cost-effective approach which may help with linkage between different eating disorder services. There was a trend towards shorter hospital stays and approaches which allow for greater connection with the community, such as day programs. Evidence was also found of treatment delays, due to system issues (long waiting lists, lack of accurate assessment and diagnosis) and patient-related barriers (stigma, recognition). Upskilling and involving primary care clinicians in diagnosis and referral as part of a stepped care model may help to address some of these concerns. Further efforts to improve mental health literacy and de-stigmatise help-seeking for eating disorders are needed.

Indexed as

Eating disordersModels of careMulti-disciplinaryPatient careReviewServicesSpecialistTreatment

Identifiers

PMID36380363
PMCPMC9667640
OpenAlexW4309092797

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.