Outcomes in people with eating disorders: a transdiagnostic and disorder‐specific systematic review, meta‐analysis and multivariable meta‐regression analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Eating disorders (EDs) are known to be associated with high mortality and often chronic and severe course, but a recent comprehensive systematic review of their outcomes is currently missing. In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we examined cohort studies and clinical trials published between 1980 and 2021 that reported, for DSM/ICD-defined EDs, overall ED outcomes (i.e., recovery, improvement and relapse, all-cause and ED-related hospitalization, and chronicity); the same outcomes related to purging, binge eating and body weight status; as well as mortality. We included 415 studies (N=88,372, mean age: 25.7±6.9 years, females: 72.4%, mean follow-up: 38.3±76.5 months), conducted in persons with anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), binge eating disorder (BED), other specified feeding and eating disorders (OSFED), and/or mixed EDs, from all continents except Africa. In all EDs pooled together, overall recovery occurred in 46% of patients (95% CI: 44-49, n=283, mean follow-up: 44.9±62.8 months, no significant ED-group difference). The recovery rate was 42% at <2 years, 43% at 2 to <4 years, 54% at 4 to <6 years, 59% at 6 to <8 years, 64% at 8 to <10 years, and 67% at ≥10 years. Overall chronicity occurred in 25% of patients (95% CI: 23-29, n=170, mean follow-up: 59.3±71.2 months, no significant ED-group difference). The chronicity rate was 33% at <2 years, 40% at 2 to <4 years, 23% at 4 to <6 years, 25% at 6 to <8 years, 12% at 8 to <10 years, and 18% at ≥10 years. Mortality occurred in 0.4% of patients (95% CI: 0.2-0.7, n=214, mean follow-up: 72.2±117.7 months, no significant ED-group difference). Considering observational studies, the mortality rate was 5.2 deaths/1,000 person-years (95% CI: 4.4-6.1, n=167, mean follow-up: 88.7±120.5 months; significant difference among EDs: p<0.01, range: from 8.2 for mixed ED to 3.4 for BN). Hospitalization occurred in 26% of patients (95% CI: 18-36, n=18, mean follow-up: 43.2±41.6 months; significant difference among EDs: p<0.001, range: from 32% for AN to 4% for BN). Regarding diagnostic migration, 8% of patients with AN migrated to BN and 16% to OSFED; 2% of patients with BN migrated to AN, 5% to BED, and 19% to OSFED; 9% of patients with BED migrated to BN and 19% to OSFED; 7% of patients with OSFED migrated to AN and 10% to BN. Children/adolescents had more favorable outcomes across and within EDs than adults. Self-injurious behaviors were associated with lower recovery rates in pooled EDs. A higher socio-demographic index moderated lower recovery and higher chronicity in AN across countries. Specific treatments associated with higher recovery rates were family-based therapy, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), psychodynamic therapy, and nutritional interventions for AN; self-help, CBT, dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT), psychodynamic therapy, nutritional and pharmacological treatments for BN; CBT, nutritional and pharmacological interventions, and DBT for BED; and CBT and psychodynamic therapy for OSFED. In AN, pharmacological treatment was associated with lower recovery, and waiting list with higher mortality. These results should inform future research, clinical practice and health service organization for persons with EDs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,014 | 0,026 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,017 | 0,052 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».