ArticleJournal of eating disorders2025
A pilot study investigating the acceptability and feasibility of a group intervention for parents of autistic young people with anorexia nervosa within a specialist eating disorders service.
Article in Journal of eating disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Eating Disorder Focused Family Therapy with Autistic Children and Young People: A Narrative Review of Recent Developments.Current psychiatry reports · 2026Review
- The intensive outreach programme for child and adolescent eating disorders: an uncontrolled case series of clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes.Journal of eating disorders · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany children and young people presenting with anorexia nervosa will also be autistic. While autistic children and young people may have similar physical health outcomes compared to their neurotypical peers, they are more likely to experience poorer recovery, requiring more intensive treatments. Similarly, parents report needing additional support from mental health services. Parents may benefit from a group intervention as an adjunct to family therapy to help them effectively care for their children and to reduce the psychological impact this may have on them. This study aimed to provide an overview of the group intervention and evaluate its feasibility and acceptability.
methodsAttendance rates were used to evaluate the feasibility of the group. Parents were invited to evaluate the acceptability of the group with brief quantitative measures each session. Individual qualitative interviews were conducted with six parents to evaluate both feasibility and acceptability. Recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
results17 parents (mothers n = 8, fathers n = 8, stepmother n = 1) from eight families took part in two pilot groups (group 1 n = 8, group 2 n = 9). Total attendance rate was 66.5%, with one parent from each family attending 85.7% of sessions. On average, sessions were rated highly relevant, useful and improved parents' understanding of their child. From qualitative interviews conducted with six parents (group 1 n = 4, group 2 n = 2), two main themes were generated: (1) A space for connection and support, (2) From knowledge to practice. Parents spoke of the way the group helped them feel less isolated, gain skills and begin to practice implementing new learning at home. Not all aspects of the group were helpful, and recommendations were made regarding the resources, structure and intensity of the intervention. DISCUSSION: Findings suggest that the intervention is feasible and acceptable. This pilot study replicates previous findings about benefits of additional support for carers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.