ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Exploring sensory aspects of cutlery in neurodivergent-informed eating disorder care.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sensory sensitivities are common in individuals with eating disorders (ED) particularly among those who are also neurodivergent. However, research has primarily focused on the sensory properties of food and clinical environments, rather than the sensory role of cutlery itself. Methods: This mixed-methods study examined how adults receiving intensive ED treatment evaluated the sensory properties of cutlery using a structured object-elicitation workshop. The study was conducted within a specialist ED service implementing the autism-friendly PEACE Pathway. Participants evaluated 31 cutlery items varying in material, weight, size, and shape. Quantitative data captured preference rankings and ratings of ease of use, comfort, and sensory pleasantness for preferred items. Qualitative data were generated through written feedback and focus group discussion and were analysed using a framework approach. Results: Metal cutlery was most frequently preferred, whereas wooden, paper-based, plastic, and hybrid designs (e.g. the spork) were consistently rejected. While participants shared many sensory constraints, there was also marked individual variation. Qualitative findings indicated that cutlery functioned as an active sensory interface, influencing comfort, predictability, and readiness to eat. Judgements were grounded in embodied evaluations of weight, balance, texture, mouth fit, and material neutrality. Preferences remained consistent across treatment contexts, with participants describing coping strategies and sensory compromises rather than changes in sensory preferences. Conclusions: Cutlery plays an important role in mealtime experience within ED treatment settings. Sensory object elicitation provides a practical method for identifying sensory preferences and translating these into design-relevant insights. These findings support the development of sensory-informed, neurodivergent-affirming adaptations in ED care environments.
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.