ArticleBMJ open2025
Prevalence of orthorexia nervosa: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
introductionOrthorexia nervosa (ON) is a newly recognised condition characterised by an excessive fixation with healthy eating, yet the prevalence of ON is poorly understood. This protocol presents the methodology to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of ON in a wide range of populations (including general population and 'high-risk'). To the authors' knowledge, the proposed review will be the first systematic review to critically appraise the quality and quantity of evidence on this topic.
methodsThe protocol has been developed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. Eligible studies will be identified through a systematic search of electronic databases (eg, Medline Complete, PsycInfo and CINAHL complete via the EBSCOHost platform and Embase). Two reviewers will independently screen and review the full text of records, extract the data and critically appraise the evidence using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for prevalence studies. A descriptive synthesis will present the characteristics of the included studies and key findings in text and tables. Where appropriate, meta-analysis will be conducted to determine the proportion of individuals with ON (yes/no) according to population groups of interest (ie, general and 'high-risk' populations) and/or ON tools. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will include published data only; thus, ethical permission will not be necessary. Results of this review will be published in a relevant peer-reviewed scientific journal and presented at conferences in related fields. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024576557.
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.