ReviewJournal of eating disorders2024
Clinical, legal and ethical implications of coercion and compulsory treatment in eating disorders: do rapid review findings identify clear answers or more muddy waters?
Review 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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effects of neuromodulation interventions on the eating behaviors of patients with eating disorders compared to healthy controls, sham therapies, and other therapeutic approaches: A systematic review.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025Pooled it
- Specialized, integrative treatment for long-standing eating disorders: early insights and implications.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Beyond Principles: A Reflective-Cognitive Framework for Ethical Decision-Making in Anorexia Nervosa.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A Deleuzian Examination of Anorexia & Recovery: Opening up Possibilities for Conceptualizing Care.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2026Article
- "Invented medicine"? Alliance building in first encounters between clinicians and adolescents with anorexia nervosa: a qualitative study.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Anorexia nervosa: 150 years of critical theory.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Review
- More pressure, more release? When compulsory care fails: an autonomy-supportive treatment policy as an alternative to failed compulsory care in inpatient care for youth with anorexia nervosa.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- PTSD and Complex PTSD in Residential Treatment for Eating Disorders: Moderating Effects on Symptom Severity and Outcome Trajectory.The International journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- Restraint for nasogastric tube feeding in young people with anorexia nervosa or atypical anorexia nervosa: a retrospective audit.Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- Navigating the Complexities of Managing Severe Anorexia Nervosa in a Medical Ward: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis Rapid Review (RR) aimed to assess the current literature over the past decade to determine the prevailing evidence regarding compulsory treatment* in eating disorders (ED). It is hoped that the review will help inform a consensus opinion as to whether this course of action confers significant clinical benefit, and importantly, to whom it should apply. The review also explores alternative options to involuntary care.
methodsFour indexing databases (OVID; ProQuest; Web of Science; PubMed/MedLine) were searched using variations of the following keywords: "coercive/detained/involuntary/least restrictive care" "treatment refusal" "incarcerated/forced/compulsory admission" "moral/ethic/legal/mental health act" "eating disorder". Research was restricted to articles published between 2013 and 2023 and included grey literature.
resultsOf 9911 articles retrieved, 34 were included for final analyses, exploring ethical, legal, and physical and mental health outcomes of compulsory treatment. Studies comprised review papers, cohort studies, cross sectional research, case series reports, ethnography, commentary papers and grey literature. The majority of studies focused on individuals with anorexia nervosa (AN). Only two papers considered compulsory treatment in individuals with other eating disorders (EDs) Findings largely align with previous reviews suggesting compulsory treatment saves lives but comes at a therapeutic and personal cost. It remains unknown as to who may benefit from compulsory treatment. The decision to invoke compulsory treatment remains with the clinician and is a responsibility that is likely to be faced by most in their care of individuals with EDs.
conclusionsSignificant gaps remain in the published literature and a clear road map for a clinician-informed decision on the submission of a compulsory treatment for a person with ED does not yet exist. Further, there is little evidence as to who is most likely to benefit from compulsory treatment. There is consensus that efforts should be concentrated on reducing instances of compulsory treatment and minimising coercion through the development of open, transparent and trusting relationships between individuals and their treating clinician. Co-produced research and the development of clinical guidelines guided by the voices of individuals with lived experience are needed to ensure minimisation of potential harm.
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.