ArticleThe International journal of eating disorders2025
Commentary on "Next Steps in Use of the Eating Disorder Examination and Related Eating Disorder Assessments: A Call for Consensus" by Reilly et al.
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. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bulimia nervosa.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026Review
- Commentary on "Next Steps in Use of the Eating Disorder Examination and Related Eating Disorder Assessments: A Call for Consensus" by Reilly et al.The International journal of eating disorders · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this Commentary is to expand upon Reilly et al. 2025's critique of the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) around a dialectic of its major strengths and its limitations. Although notable strengths of the EDE are its diagnostic case identification and detailed assessment of phenomenology, its resource intensity (training and administration) may explain why researchers and clinicians often prefer to use the EDE-Q-the self-report version of the EDE. An example of this is in the development of a national eating disorder assessment package for residential care in Australia, where the EDE-Q (not the EDE) was recommended by a committee of eating disorder experts advising the Federal Government, and subsequently the EDE-Q was used by researchers in the clinical evaluation of the first Australian residential program. The present and future need for multidimensional assessments beyond symptoms is presented. A proposal for a global consensus on harmonization of constructs in eating disorder assessment, matching a repertoire of relevant instruments suited to diverse times and places, is suggested.
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.