ReviewThe International journal of eating disorders2026
Starving for Data: Eating Disorders Prevalence and Research Gaps in Southern Africa.
Review in The International journal of eating disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Starving for Data: Eating Disorders Prevalence and Research Gaps in Southern Africa.The International journal of eating disorders · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveStudies reporting prevalence estimates of eating disorders in Southern Africa are scarce. To fill this gap, the present Research Forum reviews existing literature on the prevalence of eating disorders, including as assessed by clinical interviews, screeners, and self-reported behaviors, among individuals in Southern Africa. Key recommendations for future research directions are provided.
methodThe present Research Forum was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (#541032). Study selection followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Peer-reviewed studies in all languages were searched across multiple databases up to March 2025 using predefined keywords; 209 studies were screened for content.
resultsA total of 16 English studies in six countries were included, all published between 1981 and 2025. Eating disorder point prevalence, defined as the proportion of clinically diagnosed cases, was 0.7%. Named eating disorder prevalences ranged between 0.5% and 4.7%, and high prevalences of pica were found. Prevalence based on screening instruments, indicating increased risk (i.e., proportion scoring above the clinical cutoff) ranged from 3.5% to 37.5%. DISCUSSION: Studies were few, methodologically diverse, and culturally heterogeneous. Key recommendations for future research include examining factors related to globalization and food insecurity and their potential interplay with the manifestation of eating disorder symptomatology, exploring the roles of ethnicity and sex, evaluating the cultural appropriateness of (Western) standardized assessment tools, and incorporating more diverse samples.
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.