Clinical care for severe and persistent eating disorders in pediatric populations: Perspectives of health professionals
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: Models of treatment for adults with severe and enduring eating disorders focus on harm reduction and improving quality of life. However, there is a notable gap in the pediatric literature in this area. The current study set out to assess the perspectives of health professionals regarding clinical care for young people (e.g., ages 10-25 years) with severe and enduring eating disorders, and to explore perceptions about appropriate treatment options for these presentations. METHODS: Health professionals were invited to complete a two-stage online survey about their experiences with clinical care for pediatric eating disorders through Canadian and Australian professional eating disorder networks. Survey 1 included questions about their experiences in supporting individuals with severe and enduring presentations. Participants who completed Survey 2 reviewed clinical vignettes and shared their perspectives about treatment recommendations and models of care, including for a severe and enduring presentation. RESULTS: A total of 85 clinicians responded to questions on Survey 1 about severe and enduring eating disorder presentations. A portion of these respondents (n = 25) also participated in Survey 2. The majority of respondents to Survey 1 reported providing clinical care for pediatric severe and enduring eating disorder presentations. Amongst respondents to Survey 2, there was low consensus amongst respondents for the clinical care that would be most appropriate for young people with a severe and enduring eating disorder presentation. Numerous challenges in models of care for severe and enduring presentations in pediatric settings were raised in responses on Survey 2, with clinicians sharing their awareness of models focusing on quality of life, while also raising concerns about the appropriateness of these models for young people. CONCLUSIONS: The preliminary results of this study demonstrate that the majority of clinicians report that they have provided care to young people with severe and enduring presentations. There is a clear need for establishing guidance for clinicians working in pediatric eating disorder settings around models of care focused on quality of life. Engagement with interested parties, including those with lived experience, can clarify the development of terminology and clinical pathways for severe and enduring presentations of pediatric eating disorders.
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 | 0,011 | 0,019 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 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 ».