ReviewHealth psychology report2025
Prevalence and post-pandemic consequences of body dysmorphic disorder: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Review in Health psychology report, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) has had a growing impact in Western cultures, manifesting itself in social pressures to achieve physical standards, affecting both men and women. Media influences have magnified these ideals, promoting a standardized body appearance, which has generated an increase in appearance-related disorders. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated body concerns. Therefore, we aimed to determine the post-pandemic prevalence and its consequences. For these purposes, a systematic review was carried out based on the PRISMA strategy to identify relevant studies between 2019 and 2023 in databases such as Web of Science and Scopus. Selection criteria were applied, including cross-sectional or longitudinal studies that focused on populations without a previous diagnosis of BDD and used clinical instruments. Of the 52 articles identified, 10 met the inclusion criteria and were selected. Four were used for the systematic review and 6 to carry out the meta-analysis. The prevalence of BDD was high, at 20.8% (6 studies, logOR = 0.208 [95% CI: 0.121-0.294],
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.