ArticlePsychological review2026
Famine, plague, and slaughters: The fleeing famine hypothesis of anorexia nervosa reconsidered.
Article in Psychological review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The fleeing famine hypothesis (FFH) posits that a genetically and evolutionarily based predisposition for food restriction and hyperactivity is activated among susceptible humans and nonhumans upon experiencing a prolonged energy deficit. Such circumstances manifest in the counterintuitive responses to starvation that are characteristic of anorexia nervosa: continued dietary restriction, denial of declining physical state, and, in at least a subset of those with anorexia nervosa, increased motor activity. We consider the nine predictions derived by Guisinger (2003) in her original formulation of the FFH and evaluate the evidence regarding each, including, of course, evidence that has accumulated subsequent to the 2003 statement of the model. We further expand upon Guisinger's original hypothesis by addressing apparent contradictions, outlining important directions for future research, and discussing the clinical implications of the FFH. We conclude that the relevant literature is unsurprisingly imperfect but that, with a number of reconsiderations, the FFH has substantial explanatory scope. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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.