ArticleNutrients2025
A Scoping Review of Eating Disorder Prevention and Body Image Programs Delivered in Australian Schools.
Article in Nutrients, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- When adolescents look at their bodies: Individual and social explanations for the dissatisfaction with what they see-A cross-sectional study.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026Article
- Teacher-Led Universal Eating Disorder Prevention Programmes in Schools: A Scoping Review.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2026Article
- Adolescent Eating Disorder Risk in a Bilingual Region: Clinical Prevalence, Screening Challenges and Treatment Gap in South Tyrol, Italy.Nutrients · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEating disorders (EDs) are complex conditions with significant psychological, physical, and economic impacts, prompting national calls to prioritize ED prevention. Despite numerous prevention programs being implemented in Australian schools, no review to date has systematically mapped their scope, design, and outcomes.
aimsThis scoping review aimed to map the current landscape of school-based ED prevention programs conducted in Australia. The review focused on their methodological features, participant and school characteristics, data collected, and key findings.
methodFour electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and Scopus) were searched for relevant papers published from 2010 to February 2025. Studies were included if they reported on a school-based ED prevention program targeting Australian students. Data were extracted and narratively synthesized.
resultsA total of 23 studies were identified, representing a range of universal and selective prevention programs. Programs varied in design, delivery, and target populations, with most focusing on students in Grades 7-8. Universal media literacy programs like Media Smart showed good outcomes for boys and girls, while several selective programs demonstrated improvements in body image for girls. Interventions targeting boys or using mindfulness approaches often lacked effectiveness or caused unintended harm. Major gaps in the literature include a lack of qualitative research, limited long-term follow-up, and minimal focus on protective factors.
conclusionWhile a range of ED prevention programs have been trialed in Australian schools, few have been rigorously evaluated or demonstrated sustained effectiveness. There is a need for developmentally appropriate, gender-sensitive, and culturally inclusive prevention efforts in schools. Future research should use diverse methods, include underrepresented groups, assess long-term outcomes, integrate broader sociocultural factors shaping students' environment, and consider enhancing protective factors.
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.