MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283830445 · doi:10.1186/s40337-022-00616-8

Virtual prevention of eating disorders in children, adolescents, and emerging adults: a scoping review

2022· review· en· W4283830445 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eating Disorders · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsMcMaster Children's HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionEating disordersIntervention (counseling)CitationMedicinePsychologyFamily medicinePsychiatryLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a necessity for eating disorder (ED) outpatient treatment to be delivered virtually. Given this transition, and the surge in new ED cases, there was an urgent need to investigate virtually delivered ED prevention programs. This review aimed to identify the available evidence on virtual ED prevention programs for children, adolescents, and emerging adults. METHOD: Using scoping review methodology, seven databases were searched for studies published from January 2000 to April 2021 reporting on virtually delivered ED prevention interventions for children and adolescents (< 18 years) and emerging adults (18-25 years). Studies were excluded if they contained adults (> 25 years) and individuals with clinical ED diagnoses. Abstracts and full-text papers were reviewed independently by two reviewers. Data was extracted on study type, methodology, age, sample size, virtual intervention, outcomes, and results. In April 2022, we used a forward citation chaining process to identify any relevant articles from April 2021 to April 2022. RESULTS: Of 5129 unique studies identified, 67 met eligibility criteria, which included asynchronous (n = 35) and synchronous (n = 18) internet-based programs, other e-technology including mobile apps (n = 3) and text messaging interventions (n = 1), computer-based programs (n = 6), and online caregiver interventions focused on child outcomes (n = 4). Few studies mainly included children and adolescents (n = 18), whereas the vast majority included emerging adults (n = 49). For children and adolescents, the most widely researched programs were Student Bodies and its adapted versions (n = 4), eBody Project (n = 2), and Parents Act Now (n = 2). For emerging adults, the most widely researched programs were Student Bodies and its adapted versions (n = 16), eBody Project (n = 6) and Expand Your Horizon (n = 4). These interventions were effective at reducing various symptoms and ED risk. Some studies demonstrated that virtual prevention intervention efficacy resembled in-person delivery. CONCLUSION: Virtual prevention interventions for EDs can be effective, however more research is needed studying their impact on children and adolescents and on improving access for vulnerable groups. Additional efficacy studies are required, such as for text messaging and mobile app ED prevention interventions. Evidence-based recommendations for virtual ED prevention for children, adolescents, and emerging adults at-risk for EDs should be prioritized.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.342 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it