Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42911514›Full record

ArticleEating and weight disorders : EWD2026

Artificial intelligence in eating disorder research: a scoping review with bibliometric analysis of trends, methodologies, and translational readiness (2016-2025).

Yasin Caliskan, Mesut Sari, Hülya Binokay

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Eating and weight disorders : EWD, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Yasin CaliskanDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Istanbul Basaksehir Cam and Sakura City Hospital, University of Health Sciences, G-434 Street No: 2L Basaksehir, Istanbul, Turkey. yasin.caliskan1@sbu.edu.tr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6550-1813
Mesut SariDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University, Faculty of Medicine, Bolu, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9433-1892
Hülya BinokayDepartment of Biostatistics, Çukurova University School of Medicine, Adana, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0162-4574

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeArtificial intelligence (AI) applications in eating disorder research have expanded rapidly, yet the structure, scope, and translational readiness of this literature have not been systematically mapped. This study aimed to characterise publication trends, AI methodologies, clinical application domains, data sources, and implementation readiness across the empirical literature on AI in eating disorders.

methodsA scoping review with bibliometric analysis was conducted across three databases (PubMed [MEDLINE], the Web of Science Core Collection, and Scopus) on 20 November 2025. Studies were included if they reported original empirical research employing AI or machine learning as the primary analytical method in an eating disorder population. A total of 66 articles published between 2016 and 2025 were included. Each study was classified according to predefined taxonomies covering AI methodology, clinical application domain, data source type, implementation readiness, eating disorder type, and target population. Bibliometric indicators, including total citations, citations per year, and normalised citation counts, were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. Co-authorship, keyword co-occurrence, bibliographic coupling, and co-citation networks were constructed using Python (version 3.11) with the NetworkX and matplotlib libraries, and reporting quality was appraised using the TRIPOD+AI and CONSORT-AI statements.

resultsPublication output grew from one article in 2016 to 16 in 2025. Machine learning was the dominant AI methodology (78.8%), followed by natural language processing (19.7%) and a single conversational AI application (1.5%). The most common clinical applications were risk prediction (33.3%), diagnosis (25.8%), and treatment outcome prediction (21.2%). Clinical data (42.4%) and neuroimaging (18.2%) were the most frequently used data sources. The majority of studies remained at the laboratory stage (77.3%), with only two describing clinically deployed systems. The United States contributed 33.3% of articles; no contributions were identified from Africa, South America, or Southeast Asia.

conclusionsAI research in eating disorders is growing rapidly but remains geographically concentrated, methodologically dominated by traditional machine learning, and largely confined to laboratory settings. Adolescent populations (despite representing the peak age of eating disorder onset), bulimia nervosa, and low- and middle-income country contexts are systematically underrepresented. Closing the gap between research output and clinical implementation will require independent model validation, prospective evaluation, and sustained multidisciplinary collaboration. Level of Evidence Not applicable. This is a scoping review with bibliometric analysis that maps the scope and structure of a research field rather than evaluating clinical effectiveness; it therefore does not correspond to a traditional level-of-evidence rating.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBibliometricsFeeding and Eating DisordersTranslational Research, BiomedicalHumansMachine LearningArtificial intelligenceBibliometric analysisEating disordersMachine learningTranslational research

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.