Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37016447›Full record

ReviewJournal of eating disorders2023

Low intensity psychological interventions for the treatment of feeding and eating disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Emily Davey, Sophie D Bennett, Rachel Bryant-Waugh, Nadia Micali, Andrea Takeda, Alexia Alexandrou, Roz Shafran

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of eating disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.0field-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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Leveraging Technology to Enhance Eating Disorder Treatment Outcomes.The Psychiatric clinics of North America · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Emily DaveyUCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH, UK. emily.davey.21@ucl.ac.uk.
Sophie D BennettUCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH, UK.
Rachel Bryant-WaughDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Nadia MicaliUCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH, UK.
Andrea Takeda, Winchester, UK.
Alexia AlexandrouBarnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Roz ShafranUCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH, UK.
University College London · GBBarnet Enfield and Haringey Mental Health Trust · GBSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Geneva · CHUniversity of Winchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFeeding and eating disorders are associated with significant illness burden and costs, yet access to evidence-based care is limited. Low intensity psychological interventions have the potential to increase such access.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on the use of low intensity psychological interventions for the treatment of feeding and eating disorders. Studies comparing low intensity psychological interventions against high intensity therapies and non-eating disorder specific psychological interventions were included, as well as those with waiting list control arms. There were three primary outcomes: eating disorder psychopathology, diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM) severity specifier-related outcomes and rates of remission/recovery.

resultsThirty-three studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 3665 participants, and 30 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to high intensity therapies, low intensity psychological interventions were equivalent on reducing eating disorder psychopathology (g = - 0.13), more effective at improving DSM severity specifier-related outcomes (g = - 0.15), but less likely to achieve remission/recovery (risk ratio (RR) = 0.70). Low intensity psychological interventions were superior to non-eating disorder specific psychological interventions and waiting list controls across all three primary outcomes.

conclusionOverall, findings suggest that low intensity psychological interventions can successfully treat eating disorder symptoms. Few potential moderators had a statistically significant effect on outcome. The number of studies for many comparisons was low and the methodological quality of the studies was poor, therefore results should be interpreted with caution. More research is needed to establish the effectiveness of low intensity psychological interventions for children and young people, as well as for individuals with anorexia nervosa, avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder, pica and rumination disorder.

Indexed as

Feeding and eating disordersLow intensity psychological interventionMeta-analysisSelf-helpSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37016447
PMCPMC10072817
OpenAlexW4362595880

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.