A decade of data from a specialist statewide child and adolescent eating disorder service: does local service access correspond with the severity of medical and eating disorder symptoms at presentation?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Eating disorders affect up to 3% of children and adolescents, with recovery often requiring specialist treatment. A substantial literature has accrued suggesting that lower access to health care services, experienced by rural populations, has a staggering effect on health-related morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether lower service access foreshadowed a more severe medical and symptom presentation among children and adolescents presenting to a specialist eating disorders program. METHOD: The data source was the Helping to Outline Paediatric Eating Disorders (HOPE) Project registry (N ~1000), a prospective ongoing registry study comprising consecutive paediatric tertiary eating disorder referrals. The sample consisted of 399 children and adolescents aged 8 to 16 years (M =14.49, 92% female) meeting criteria for a DSM-5 eating disorder. RESULTS: Consistent with the hypotheses, lower service access was associated with a lower body mass index z-score and a higher likelihood of medical complications at intake assessment. Contrary to our hypothesis, eating pathology assessed at intake was associated with higher service access. No relationship was observed between service access and duration of illness or percentage of body weight lost. CONCLUSIONS: Lower service access is associated with more severe malnutrition and medical complications at referral to a specialist eating disorder program. These findings have implications for service planning and provision for rural communities to equalize health outcomes.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".