Perfectionism in Children and Adolescents with Eating-Related Symptoms: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis of Effect Estimates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Over 40 years of research implicates perfectionism in eating disorders in childhood and adolescence. However, the nature of this relationship remains understudied. To address this gap, we performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis to quantify the magnitude of the associations between perfectionism (i.e., unidimensional perfectionism, perfectionistic strivings, and perfectionistic concerns) and eating-related symptoms during childhood and adolescence. Methods: The literature search was conducted using five electronic databases in accordance with PRISMA guidelines: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, APA PsycINFO, and EMB Reviews. A total of 904 studies were identified; a total of 126 were included in the systematic review, and 65 in the meta-analysis (N = 29,268). Sensitivity analyses were also carried out to detect potential differences in age and clinical status. Results: All the associations we investigated were both significant and positive. Small effect sizes were found between eating global scores and unidimensional perfectionism, perfectionistic strivings, and perfectionistic concerns (res = 0.19, res = 0.21, res = 0.12, respectively) and remained significant in each age group in both clinical and community samples. Perfectionistic concerns were moderately associated with all eating measures, especially in community samples and samples with a mean age under 14. Conclusions: Psychological interventions specially designed to target perfectionistic concerns in the early stages of development may help prevent the onset or reduce the intensity of eating-related symptoms during childhood and adolescence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".