ArticleInternational journal of mental health nursing2026
Iatrogenic Harm, Psychotherapy, and Eating Disorders: An Urgent Call to Action.
Article in International journal of mental health nursing, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Iatrogenic harm in psychotherapy remains under-recognised, despite longstanding evidence that psychological treatments can produce adverse effects. This omission is consequential in eating disorder care, where treatment is often intensive, prolonged and characterised by significant power asymmetries alongside poor long-term outcomes. This article examines iatrogenic harm in the context of eating disorders through an epistemic justice and intersectional framework. Drawing on qualitative and lived-experience-led scholarship, it argues that iatrogenesis is produced through structural features of mental health systems, including rigid diagnostic practices and manualised treatment models, limited professional accountability and the marginalisation of experiential knowledge. Treatment dropout and the attribution of treatment failure to patients are examined as mechanisms that obscure harm and inflate perceptions of treatment safety and effectiveness. Rather than rejecting evidence-based psychotherapy, the article calls for epistemic pluralism, routine monitoring and reporting of iatrogenesis and meaningful co-production as prerequisites for ethical, accountable and humane eating disorder 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.