Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38581055›Full record

ArticleJournal of eating disorders2024

Clinician perspectives of the implementation of an early intervention service for eating disorders in England: a mixed method study.

Katie L Richards, Matthew Phillips, Luiza Grycuk, Lucy Hyam, Karina Allen, Ulrike Schmidt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of eating disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katie L RichardsCentre for Research in Eating and Weight Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AB, UK. katie.1.richards@kcl.ac.uk.
Matthew PhillipsCentre for Research in Eating and Weight Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AB, UK.
Luiza GrycukCentre for Research in Eating and Weight Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AB, UK.
Lucy HyamCentre for Research in Eating and Weight Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AB, UK.
Karina AllenCentre for Research in Eating and Weight Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AB, UK.
Ulrike SchmidtCentre for Research in Eating and Weight Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AB, UK.
King's College London · GBSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) service has been shown to reduce the wait for care and improve clinical outcomes in initial evaluations. These findings led to the national scaling of FREED in England. To support this scaling, we conducted a mixed method evaluation of the perceptions and experiences of clinicians in the early phases of scaling. The Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used as a conceptual lens to understand if and how FREED becomes embedded in routine practice.

methodsThe convergent mixed method evaluation included 21 semi-structured interviews with clinicians from early adopter sites and 211 surveys administered to clinicians before, immediately after and 3 months after the FREED training. The interview guide and survey included questions evaluating attitudes towards early intervention for eating disorders (EDs) and NPT mechanisms. Interview data were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis. The NPT was applied to the inductively derived themes to evaluate if and how NPT domains impacted the implementation. Survey data were analysed using multilevel growth models.

resultsSix themes and 15 subthemes captured barriers and facilitators to implementation at the patient, clinician, service, intervention, implementation and wider system levels. These interacted with the NPT mechanisms to facilitate or hinder the embedding of FREED. Overall, clinicians were enthusiastic and positive towards early intervention for EDs and FREED, largely because of the expectation of improved patient outcomes. This was a considerable driver in the uptake and implementation of FREED. Clinicians also had reservations about capacity and the potential impact on other patients, which, at times, was a barrier for its use. The FREED training led to significant improvements in positive attitudes and NPT mechanisms that were largely maintained at the 3-month follow-up. However, negative attitudes did not significantly improve following training.

conclusionsPositive attitudes towards early intervention for EDs increased enthusiasm and engagement with the model. Features of the model and its implementation were effective at developing adopter commitment and capabilities. However, there were aspects of the model and its implementation which require attention in the future (e.g., capacity and the potential impact on the wider service).

Indexed as

Early interventionEating disordersImplementationNormalisation process theory

Identifiers

PMID38581055
PMCPMC10996085
OpenAlexW4393992329

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.