The use of herbal remedies by adolescents with eating disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency and type of herbal remedies and the reasons for herbal remedy use by adolescents with eating disorders. METHODS: Forty-six female adolescent females (age range, 10-17 years; mean age, 15 +/- 1.3 years) in a tertiary-care pediatric eating disorder treatment center from May 1998 to July 2000 volunteered for this cross-sectional study. They met the criteria for anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, or eating disorder not otherwise specified. Participants completed a 92-item self-administered questionnaire. We summarized information on demographics, use of herbal remedies, knowledge of safety issues of herbal remedies, and trust in the health care system. RESULTS: Of these 46 subjects, 17 (37%) used herbal remedies. Of these 17 subjects, 35% (6 of 17) used herbal remedies to decrease their appetites and to induce vomiting, 41% (7 of 17) knew nothing about herbal remedies, despite their use of these products, and 24% (4 of 17) reported that their physicians asked whether they used herbal remedies. The participants did not use herbal remedies because of their dissatisfaction with allopathic medicine. DISCUSSION: Adolescents with eating disorders frequently used herbal remedies for both weight control and non-weight control purposes. They did not regularly inform their physicians about their use of herbal remedies and physicians did not regularly inform their patients about this use. The generally high prevalence of herbal remedy use in this population suggests that health care providers need to be knowledgeable and should enquire about patients' use of these products. The perceived benefits, adverse effects, and herb-drug interactions of self-prescribed herbal remedies consumed by adolescents with eating disorders are unknown and further research is needed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".