ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2026
Eating disorder severity and treatment outcome across race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status: Intersectional inequities in a clinical sample.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Marginalized populations experience increased eating disorder (ED) risk and encounter significant barriers to treatment. Intersectionality provides a framework for understanding how systemic oppression contributes to inequities in EDs; however, intersectional approaches have yet to be applied to a clinical ED sample. The current study examined inequities in ED severity and treatment outcome across the intersections of race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status (SES). Adult women (N=3016; M = 27.2 years) with transdiagnostic EDs presenting to affiliated treatment sites across the United States completed the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) at admission and discharge. Race/ethnicity and sexual orientation were self-reported; SES was measured using the area deprivation index of participants' neighborhoods. Multilevel Analysis of Individual Heterogeneity and Discriminatory Accuracy (MAIHDA) was used to estimate baseline EDE-Q global score; change in EDE-Q global score and binge eating, self-induced vomiting, laxative use, and driven exercise frequency from admission to discharge; and reason for discharge (routine or non-routine) across intersectional subgroups. In this sample of women with access to treatment, MAIHDA models predicted higher baseline levels of overall ED pathology among sexual minorities (predicted M = 4.10). Few differences in ED symptom improvement were observed across intersectional subgroups, with some small yet potentially meaningful inequities. Racially/ethnically minoritized subgroups appeared slightly less likely to complete treatment (predicted percent non-routine discharge = 41.50%). Future research should build on these findings by analyzing other dimensions of inequity (e.g., gender, weight status, disability status) to further characterize and address intersecting systems of oppression that disparately influence ED outcomes.
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.