Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40091451›Full record

ArticleJournal of health psychology2025

People at-risk of an eating disorder are more likely to endorse dietary misinformation claims and hold rigid beliefs.

Neophytos Georgiou, Matt Thompson, Victoria Bridgland, Tracey Wade, Ryan Balzan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Neophytos GeorgiouFlinders University, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7868-8250
Matt ThompsonFlinders University, Australia.
Victoria BridglandFlinders University, Australia.
Tracey WadeFlinders University, Australia.
Ryan BalzanFlinders University, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People are exposed to misinformation about dieting practices every day on social media which can influence their health and wellbeing. While misinformation research has largely focused on general vulnerabilities to misinformation and strategies to counteract its spread, limited work has examined how specific harmful content, such as dietary misinformation, influences vulnerable groups, particularly those at risk of eating disorders (EDs). This study investigated whether individuals at risk of an ED were more likely to endorse Dietary Misinformation. After completing measures of dietary intentions, health conscientiousness and weight concern, 215 participants completed a behavioural measure of belief rigidity (i.e. Bias Against Disconfirmatory Evidence; BADE), and measures of general and diet-specific misinformation susceptibility. The findings suggest that participants who score highly on weight concern (ie, potentially at risk for an ED), were less likely to show belief flexibility and integrate new evidence and are more inclined to endorse diet-specific misinformation. This research highlights the broader importance of drawing attention to how particular misinformation online can affect the wellbeing of those potentially in vulnerable groups, in this case those at ED risk.

Indexed as

CommunicationDietFeeding and Eating DisordersHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSocial MediaYoung Adultcognitive biasdieteating disordershealthmisinformationsocial media

Identifiers

PMID40091451
PMCPMC12618702

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.