ReviewFrontiers in psychology2025
Bridging the gaps in eating disorder care: a systematic and comparative review of guidelines for prevention, early intervention, and service delivery.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. 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
- Expression of concern · 2025-10-30Concerns/Issues about Article · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Updated to Retraction ·
- Retraction · 2026-02-03Euphemisms for Plagiarism · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Plagiarism of/in Article · Upgrade/Update of Prior Notice(s) ·
- Expression of concern
- Retracted
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Eating Disorders (EDs) pose a significant public health challenge due to their psychiatric and somatic complexity, high chronicity, and elevated mortality rates. Despite the growing body of evidence and international awareness, the quality and consistency of clinical guidelines remain variable. Objective: This systematic review aimed to evaluate and compare existing clinical guidelines and position papers addressing prevention, early intervention, and multidisciplinary treatment for EDs. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed and American Psychological Association (APA) PsycINFO was conducted for documents published between January 2015 and March 2025. Eighteen documents were included, encompassing formal guidelines, consensus statements, and national policies. Key domains were extracted and synthesized across documents. Quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tools. Results: Substantial convergence was found in the emphasis on nutritional rehabilitation, psychological therapy, and medical monitoring (87.5, 87.5, and 81.3% of guidelines, respectively). Stepped-care models and multidisciplinary approaches were frequently endorsed but unevenly operationalized. In contrast, recommendations on pharmacotherapy (37.5%) and prevention strategies (43.8%) were less consistently addressed. Major gaps included the lack of standardized criteria for care levels, limited guidance on comorbidity management, and underrepresentation of recovery-oriented models. Notably, Italy lacks a centralized national guideline for EDs. Conclusion: This review highlights both commonalities and critical divergences in current ED guidelines. The findings underscore the need for international harmonization, clearer implementation tools, and stronger integration of early intervention and recovery frameworks. These insights can inform future policy development, clinical training, and service reorganization to improve outcomes and equity in ED care.
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.