ArticleJournal of eating disorders2025
Equity in eating disorders: a dialectical approach to stigma, expertise, and the coproduction of knowledge.
Article in Journal of eating disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reflections on the role of Peer Researchers in eating disorders: identifying challenges, best practices, and future directions.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Ignorance culture and eating disorders: lived experience analysis of alarms being ignored.BJPsych bulletin · 2026Review
- Collective responsibility and ecological thinking in eating disorders: moving beyond individualistic models of illness and recovery.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Do new labels solve old problems? Conceptual, ethical, and clinical challenges of constructing restrictive eating behaviours as "self-harm".Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Partnering with people with lived experience in eating disorder research: conceptual and practical considerations.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Conceptualising trauma in eating disorders: a reflexive commentary on the role of neglect, iatrogenic harm, and epistemic injury.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- The importance of learning from people with lived experiences of eating disorders.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Who gets to decide? Matters arising from Robinson et al. (2024), "Can people with longstanding bulimia nervosa suffer from severe and enduring eating disorder? A qualitative study".Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Moving from recognising to responding to oral health needs in eating disorders: matters arising from Gidlund et al., 2025.Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- "I could be living a totally different life right now": lived experience and caregiver perspectives on the prevention of eating disorders.Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- Embracing embodied movement in eating disorder recovery: matters arising from Bongiorno and Heaner (2025).Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- Beyond the methodological binary: coproduction as the third pillar of mental health science.BMJ mental health · 2025Article
- A shift or a substitution? On naming, exclusion, and co-production in longstanding eating disorders: matters arising from Lubieniecki et al. (2025).Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- Re-imagining connection: the role of late autism diagnosis in eating disorder recovery and social support.Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- From laboratory to life: Integrating diverse ways of knowing in mental health science.Brain and neuroscience advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Within mental health research, there has been a growing recognition of the importance of the knowledge obtained through lived experiences of illness, treatment, recovery, and health. In recent years, the field of eating disorders has seen an emergence of co-produced knowledge, in particular in the co-design of patient-facing materials for use in clinical settings, and a growing body of rich qualitative research by those who may straddle the identities of clinician, researcher and person with lived/living experience. However, there are significant variations in how expertise by experience is defined and utilised within research and clinical practice, and persisting inequities in the extent to which people with lived experience are afforded the agency to define their illnesses and treatment. This paper's authorship is a collaboration between those with personal and professional relationships with the subject of eating disorders, bringing to life the concept of sharing power and decision-making across multiple viewpoints and identities. Situating knowledge about eating disorders and stigma within a wider historical and philosophical context, the authors argue that persisting inequities in research and clinical practice are rooted in multiple stigmas. To address this, a 'dialectical' stance is proposed, which draws upon Dialectical Behaviour Therapy and broader principles of coproduction to offer a practical approach to operationalising epistemic justice and dismantling stigma in the field.
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.