ArticleEating and weight disorders : EWD2023
U.S. health professionals' perspectives on orthorexia nervosa: clinical utility, measurement and diagnosis, and perceived influence of sociocultural factors.
Article in Eating and weight disorders : EWD, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study examined U.S. health professionals' perspectives on the clinical utility, measurement, and etiology of orthorexia nervosa (ON).
methodsParticipants (n = 100) were U.S. health professionals with experience working clinically with eating disorders, including trainees, Ph.D. psychologists, social workers/mental health counselors, and medical health professionals. After reviewing the proposed ON criteria, participants responded to questions regarding the clinical utility, diagnosis, and measurement of ON, and sociocultural influence on the emergence of ON. Views of ON as a useful diagnostic category were examined as a function of participants' current involvement in clinical versus research activities.
resultsParticipants mostly (71.9%) agreed that ON should be a distinct clinical diagnosis. Participants who endorsed ON as a valid diagnosis spent more time on clinical work and less time engaged in research compared to participants who disagreed (both ps < 0.05). Approximately 27% of participants believed additional components should be added to the proposed ON diagnostic criteria. Participants indicated that sociocultural factors have considerable influence on the development of ON, namely the diet and weight loss industry, and the perceptions that biological/organic/vegan and low fat/low carb/gluten free food are the healthiest.
conclusionProfessionals who spent more time working clinically with eating disorders were more likely to endorse ON as a unique disorder, and professionals who spent more time on research were more likely to disagree. To the extent that professionals who spend more time on research may shape the narrative around ON more visibly, this study underscores the importance of listening to practitioners' experiences in applied settings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V: Opinions of authorities, based on descriptive studies, narrative reviews, clinical experience, or reports of expert committees.
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.