Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42014370›Full record

Trial reportThe International journal of eating disorders2026

Personalized Treatment Selection for Digital Eating Disorder Interventions: A Proof-of-Concept for the Personalized Advantage Index.

Zoe McClure, Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Mariel Messer, Jake Linardon

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The International 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Zoe McClureSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3926-8058
Matthew Fuller-TyszkiewiczSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1145-6057
Mariel MesserSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7186-7264
Jake LinardonSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4475-7139

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAlthough a range of evidence-based treatments for eating disorders exist, treatment response varies substantially. The ability to match individuals to a treatment which they are most likely to benefit from may help improve treatment efficiency and therapeutic outcomes. The present study applies a treatment selection approach called the personalized advantage index (PAI) and evaluates its utility for matching individuals to a broad versus focused digital program for eating disorder symptoms.

methodData were used from a randomized non-inferiority trial comparing the two interventions (n = 214). Machine learning models (elastic net and random forest) were trained to predict post-intervention symptom severity for a broad and focused digital intervention using 40 self-reported baseline predictors. The PAI was calculated to identify the predicted optimal treatment for each participant.

resultsElastic net performed marginally better than the random forest at predicting intervention outcomes (Elastic net R DISCUSSION: PAI-based treatment matching did not improve post-treatment outcomes in this context. Greater utility of the PAI approach may emerge when applied to different treatment orientations or delivery formats, enabling greater opportunity for differential effects to emerge.

Indexed as

Feeding and Eating DisordersPrecision MedicineAdultDigital MediaFemaleHumansMachine LearningProof of Concept StudyRandom ForestTreatment Effect HeterogeneityTreatment Outcomedigital interventioneating disorderpersonalized advantage indextreatment selection

Identifiers

PMID42014370
PMCPMC13446245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.