MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392392433 · doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2024.02.009

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Child and Adolescent Healthcare Utilization for Eating Disorders During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2024· review· en· W4392392433 on OpenAlexaff
Sheri Madigan, Tracy Vaillancourt, Gina Dimitropoulos, Shainur Premji, Selena M. Kahlert, Katie Zumwalt, Daphne J. Korczak, Kristin M. von Ranson, Paolo Pador, Heather Ganshorn, Ross D. Neville

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaHotchkiss Brain InstituteAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOMeta-analysisMedicineEating disordersMEDLINEPandemicEmergency departmentModerationRelative riskPediatricsHealth careInpatient carePsychiatryConfidence intervalCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a meta-analysis documenting healthcare service utilization rates for pediatric (age <19 years) eating disorders during compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched for studies published up to May 19, 2023. Studies with pediatric visits to primary care, inpatient, outpatient, and emergency department for eating disorders before and during the pandemic were included. This preregistered review (PROSPERO CRD42023413392) was reported using PRISMA guidelines. Data were analyzed with random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: A total of 52 studies reporting >148,000 child and adolescent eating disorder-related visits to >300 health settings across 15 countries were included (mean age, 12.7 years; SD = 4.1 years; 87% girls). There was strong evidence of an increase in healthcare use for eating disorders during the pandemic (rate ratio [RR] = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.38-1.71). Moderator analysis revealed larger rate increases among girls (RR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.28-1.71) compared to boys (RR = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.06-1.45) and for adolescents (age ≥12 to 19 years) (RR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.29-1.81) compared to children (RR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.53-1.43). Moderator analysis demonstrated strong evidence of increased use of emergency department (RR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.48-1.97), inpatient (RR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.33-1.84), and outpatient (RR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.35-1.95) services, as well as strong evidence of increased rates of anorexia nervosa (RR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.24-1.75). CONCLUSION: Healthcare use for pediatric eating disorders increased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly among girls and adolescents. It is important to continue to monitor whether changes in healthcare use associated with acute pediatric mental distress are sustained beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: In this study, the authors analyzed data from 52 studies from 15 countries and found a significant increase in healthcare utilization for eating disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study findings suggest a larger rate increase among adolescents as compared to children, in girls versus boys, and for anorexia nervosa in particular. Results also indicate increased use of emergency department, inpatient and outpatient services for eating disorders during the pandemic. STUDY PREREGISTRATION INFORMATION: Risk factors for eating disorders for youth during the COVID-19 pandemic; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/; CRD42023413392. DIVERSITY & INCLUSION STATEMENT: One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science. One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as living with a disability. We actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our author group. We actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our author group. While citing references scientifically relevant for this work, we also actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our reference list. While citing references scientifically relevant for this work, we also actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our reference list. The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location and/or community where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work. One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented sexual and/or gender groups in science.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0260.063
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent PsychiatrySame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207