ArticleJournal of eating disorders2025
'Falling down the rabbit hole': a thematic analysis of young people's views on TikTok algorithms and eating disorder content.
Article in 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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Associations of Problematic Smartphone Use and Smartphone Screen Time With Eating Disorder Psychopathology in Non-Clinical Samples: A Systematic Review.JMIR mental health · 2026Pooled it
- Adolescents' Experiences of Social Media Content Types and Wellbeing: A Photo-Elicitation Interview Study.Journal of adolescence · 2026Article
- TikTok and Eating Disorders: A Narrative Review.The International journal of eating disorders · 2026Review
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
Abstract
backgroundTikTok's algorithm is at the centre of its user experience. The platform, which allows users to create and consume short-form content, can enable young people (YP) to feel less alone when experiencing illnesses such as eating disorders (EDs) by encouraging them to build communities around mental health-related content. However, emerging research suggests TikTok's algorithm might exacerbate ED symptoms by leading YP into spirals of ED content. This paper provides a lived experience perspective on what experiencing high volumes of ED content on TikTok's For You Page (FYP) can be like for YP.
methodsWe conducted 17 semi-structured interviews in which participants (UK-based, aged 18-25, with experience of disordered eating or an ED) described their experiences of using TikTok. We identified three themes that express how participants interact with ED content on TikTok: (1) View One, See More, (2) Morbid Curiosity, and (3) From Helpful to Unhelpful. Theme 1 describes viewing one unhelpful video and then being exposed to more of this content on the FYP. Theme 2 refers to YPs descriptions of a strong impulse to view ED content when it surfaces on their FYP even if it is felt to be unhelpful. Theme 3 recounts YPs experiences of viewing potentially helpful content (e.g., pro-recovery videos) and then being presented with pro-ED content on the FYP. Through a close linguistic analysis, we examine how participants talk about how they feel when viewing ED content on TikTok.
findingsParticipants reported engaging regularly with ED content on TikTok. Their interactions with ED content show that the personalised nature of TikTok's algorithm (which is sensitised to how long a user watches a video) can interact with and exacerbate some ED behaviours and psychologies, leading some YP into what they describe as negative echo-chambers of ED content.
conclusionPlatforms should assume greater responsibility for their algorithms' roles in intensifying ED symptoms and improve the efficacy of functions that help users control the content they see. A greater awareness of the role of TikTok in exacerbating ED thoughts and behaviours among mental health professionals is also necessary.
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.