Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40125881›Full record

ArticleThe International journal of eating disorders2025

Perceived Barriers and Facilitators of Use of Artificial Intelligence in Eating Disorder Care: A Commentary on Linardon et al. (2025).

Gemma Sharp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The International journal of eating disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Gemma SharpSchool of Psychology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9946-518X

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council GNT2016629
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to revolutionize mental health care, including for eating disorders, but there are still a number of concerns focused on ethics, governance, and regulation. As the authors found in their preliminary survey study involving mental health clinicians and people experiencing eating disorder symptoms, there was support and recognition of the benefits of AI tools in eating disorder care. However, participants also had concerns surrounding issues like data privacy, governance, information accuracy, and therapeutic rapport. From our own research involving the development of multiple AI tools, particularly chatbots, to assist people experiencing eating disorders and their loved ones, we suggest that these perceived barriers can be overcome with thoughtful and comprehensive codesign with multidisciplinary teams following ethical frameworks for AI and digital technologies. In this way, we can optimally mitigate the risk of using AI tools while still offering the most advanced technologies to treat eating disorders.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceFeeding and Eating DisordersHumansartificial intelligencebarrierschatbotdigital healtheating disordersethicsfacilitators

Identifiers

PMID40125881
PMCPMC12138855

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.