Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41132608›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2025

Bridging the gaps in eating disorder care: a systematic and comparative review of guidelines for prevention, early intervention, and service delivery.

Francesco Monaco, Annarita Vignapiano, Stefania Landi, Ernesta Panarello, Ilaria Pullano, Martina D'Angelo, Anna Longobardi, Benedetta di Gruttola, Valeria Di Stefano, Raffaele Malvone and 4 more

RetractedAbstract readReviewRetracted Publication
In one paragraph

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 It has been retracted, and should not be counted.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.

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Francesco Monaco *Department of Mental Health, ASL Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
Annarita Vignapiano *Department of Mental Health, ASL Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
Stefania LandiDepartment of Mental Health, ASL Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
Ernesta PanarelloDepartment of Mental Health, ASL Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
Ilaria PullanoPsychiatric Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University Magna Graecia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy.
Martina D'AngeloPsychiatric Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University Magna Graecia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy.
Anna LongobardiDepartment of Mental Health, ASL Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
Benedetta di GruttolaDepartment of Mental Health, ASL Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
Valeria Di StefanoPsychiatric Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University Magna Graecia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy.
Raffaele MalvoneDepartment of Mental Health, ASL Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
Agnese FerraraDepartment of Mental Health, ASL Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
Alessandra MarennaEuropean Biomedical Research Institute of Salerno (EBRIS), Salerno, Italy.
Giulio CorrivettiDepartment of Mental Health, ASL Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
Luca SteardoPsychiatric Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University Magna Graecia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

clinical guidelinesearly interventioneating disordershealth policymultidisciplinary careprevention

Identifiers

PMID41132608
PMCPMC12540388

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.