ArticleJournal of eating disorders2026
Who gets to decide? Matters arising from Robinson et al. (2024), "Can people with longstanding bulimia nervosa suffer from severe and enduring eating disorder? A qualitative study".
Article 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 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.
- Reflections on the role of Peer Researchers in eating disorders: identifying challenges, best practices, and future directions.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Written by a researcher with lived experience of long-standing bulimia nervosa, this Matters Arising piece commends Robinson et al. (2024)'s study for its focus on exploring the subjective experiences of patients who are often overlooked in clinical and academic discussions. However, several concerns can be raised about the epistemological, methodological, and ethical foundations of this research. These include the limited engagement of participants with the terminology used to describe their experiences, and the use of language which remains contested. The author highlights how this approach risks imposing external narratives on participants, arguing instead for more equitable co-production methodologies which include participants as epistemic agents in their own right. Recommendations for future research include the equitable inclusion of people with lived experience, recognising the limits of current evidence, respecting and promoting diversity, and prioritising reflexivity and rigour in qualitative research. These recommendations aim to ensure that future studies reflect the complexity and heterogeneity of lived experiences while maintaining scientific and ethical integrity.
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.