ArticleBMC public health2025
Adaptations of an online cognitive-behavioral therapy intervention for binge type eating disorders in publicly-insured and uninsured adults: a pilot study.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinician Practices in Determining Expected Body Weights Across Eating Disorders: A Mixed Methods Study.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2026Article
- Understanding Engagement Experiences in an Adapted Digital Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Lower-Income Adults With Eating Disorders With Binge Eating and/or Purging: A Qualitative Analysis of Barriers and Facilitators.The International journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Exploring expectations for a digital intervention for binge eating among individuals experiencing food insecurity.Eating behaviors · 2026Article
- Global Burden, Temporal Trends, and Long-Term Projections of Mental Disorders Among Women of Childbearing Age: A GBD 2021 Analysis Using BAPC Modeling.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Open Pilot Trial of a Coached Digital Program for Lower-Income Adults With Eating Disorders.The International journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPublicly-insured and uninsured individuals-many of whom are marginalized because of race/ethnicity, ability status, and/or other social identities-experience barriers to accessing evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for eating disorders (EDs). Additionally, EBIs have not been developed with or for diverse populations, exacerbating poor treatment uptake. Mobile technology is well-positioned to bridge this gap and increase access to low-cost, culturally-sensitive EBIs.
methodsThis study leverages a user-centered design approach to adapt an existing coached cognitive-behavioral therapy-based digital program and evaluate its usability in a sample of 11 participants with (sub)clinical binge type EDs who are publicly-insured (n = 10) or uninsured (n = 1). Participants were primarily non-Latinx White women (n = 8). Two semi-structured interviews occurred with participants: one to assess treatment needs and the other to obtain program-specific feedback. Interviews were coded using inductive thematic analysis.
resultsInterview 1 feedback converged on three themes: Recovery Journey, Treatment Experiences, and Engagement with and Expectations for Online Programs. Participants endorsed facing barriers to healthcare, such as poor insurance coverage and a lack of trained providers, and interest in a coach to increase treatment accountability. Interview 2 feedback converged on three themes: Content Development, Participant Experiences with Mental Health, and Real-World Use. Participants liked the content but emphasized the need to improve diverse representation (e.g., gender, body size).
conclusionsOverall, user feedback is critical to informing adaptations to the original EBI so that the intervention can be appropriately tailored to the needs of this underserved population, which ultimately has high potential to address critical barriers to ED treatment.
trial registrationThis study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University California, San Francisco (IRB #22-35936) and the IRB at Washington University in St. Louis (IRB ID 202304167).
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.