ReviewInteractive journal of medical research2025
Digital Interventions for Improving Body Dissatisfaction in Children and Emerging Adults: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Interactive journal of medical research, 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.
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Body dissatisfaction is a condition where individuals are dissatisfied with their physical appearance. It has become a global issue, especially among children and emerging adults. A growing number of digital interventions have been developed to address body dissatisfaction in children and emerging adults; however, controversies remain regarding their efficacy, underscoring the need for a comprehensive synthesis of current evidence. Objective: This systematic review aimed to explore the effectiveness of digital interventions in improving body image-related outcomes among children and emerging adults. Methods: From inception to April 24, 2024, a literature search was performed across 7 databases-PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EBSCO (Elton B Stephens Company), Cochrane Library, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), and WANFANG-to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a predefined set of inclusion criteria. This systematic review was reported in line with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool 2.0 were conducted independently by 2 researchers. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% CIs from the included RCTs were calculated for the meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed with I² values. A fixed-effects model was used when I²≤50%, and a random-effects model was selected when I²>50%. Results: Twenty RCTs with 5251 participants (2610 in intervention groups and 2641 in control groups) met the inclusion criteria. Digital interventions included web pages, mobile apps, computer-based videos, computer-based sessions, internet-based sessions, internet games, chatbots, podcasts, and social media. Our results indicate that digital interventions could significantly improve body dissatisfaction (SMD=0.38, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.13; I2=55%; P=.003), physical appearance comparison (SMD=-0.24, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.03; I2=0%; P=.003), thin-ideal internalization (SMD=-0.28, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.2; I2=41%; P<.001), self-esteem (SMD=0.14, 95% CI 0.07-0.21; I2=21%; P<.001), self-compassion (SMD=0.55, 95% CI 0.33-0.78; I2=35%; P<.001), and depression (SMD=-0.59, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.21; I2=0%; P=.002), with small to medium effect sizes. Conclusions: While digital interventions improved body dissatisfaction among children and emerging adults, additional well-designed, rigorous, and large-scale RCTs are needed to decisively provide estimates of the effectiveness of digital interventions on body dissatisfaction.
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.