ArticleSystematic reviews2025
Do we need to "man up" feeding and eating disorders treatments? Protocol for a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of gender effects on intervention outcomes.
Article in Systematic reviews, 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.
- Eating Disorders in Boys and Men: A Gender-Critical Narrative Review on Recognition, Stigma, and Treatment.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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFeeding and eating disorders lead to serious health impairments. Boys and men are increasingly affected and may account for a fourth of clinical cases. Current evidence suggests that symptoms and health care needs differ between men and women (e.g., related to muscularity concerns), and that men delay seeking treatment due to the traditional understanding of eating disorders as "women's disease". Treatment guidelines recommend psychotherapy as first-line intervention, but potential gender differences in treatment responses have not been considered. This is due to the lack of systematic evaluations of gender differences related to treatment outcomes for feeding and eating disorders.
methodsThis systematic review with Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis (IPDMA) will compare the effects of psychotherapeutic interventions for feeding and eating disorders between gender groups. The focus of the analysis is on eating disorders-related psychopathology. For this purpose, randomized-controlled clinical studies will be identified in scientific databases and examined for their methodological quality. Primary investigators will be contacted to deliver anonymized data of their studies. Study results will then be summarized and compared in a two-staged IPDMA. Gender groups will be compared regarding different types of interventions and further relevant intervention characteristics, as identified by men with lived experience. DISCUSSION: The results will help to formulate treatment recommendations and identify the treatment contexts that are associated with unfavorable outcomes related to patient gender. This may fuel efforts of adapting established interventions to best meet the health care needs of men and women in the context of eating disorders. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022372712.
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.