ReviewJournal of eating disorders2026
Efficacy of interventions to prevent eating disorders in people with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review.
Review in Journal of eating disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Psychological research in eating disorders/disordered eating in type 1 diabetes: A systematic review using the NIH stage model for behavioural intervention development.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluation of a novel eating disorder prevention programme (Australian diabetes body project) for young women with type 1 diabetes in a clinic setting: A randomized controlled trial protocol.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Trial
- Strategic Priorities for Advancing Eating Disorder Risk Reduction: A Narrative Review.The International journal of eating disorders · 2026Review
- Disordered Eating Behaviours and Associated Factors Among People With Type 1 Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional Study in Spain-D1ANAS Project.Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews · 2026Article
- Evaluating the implementation of the Diabetes Body Project in a clinical cohort of Australian adolescents with type 1 diabetes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndividuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) are at increased risk of developing disordered eating (DE) and eating disorders (ED). Diabetes self-management focuses on food and insulin administration, which may contribute to development of EDs. The dual diagnosis may contribute to suboptimal glycemia, early diabetes-related complications and mortality. Evidence for ED prevention programs for this high-risk population remains limited. This systematic review aims to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of available interventions to prevent EDs and improve glycemia in people with T1D.
methodsA literature search of PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science was conducted on 25 January 2025. Studies using randomized controlled, quasi-experimental or cohort design that targeted ED prevention in T1D population were included.
resultsNine studies met the inclusion criteria, featuring interventions such as cognitive dissonance based programs, psychoeducation and self-compassion programs. Cognitive dissonance based programs demonstrated the most consistent reduction in ED risks and symptoms. However, most studies showed negligible improvement in glycemia. Common limitations were small sample sizes, high drop-out rates and short follow-ups.
conclusionFuture research should focus on well-powered RCTs to evaluate interventions over longer timeframes, younger age groups, both genders, carer involvement and additional modifications to improve glycemia concurrently.
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.