MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406342288 · doi:10.1186/s40337-024-01173-y

Eating disorders in minority ethnic populations in Australia, Canada, Aotearoa New Zealand and the UK: a scoping review

2025· review· en· W4406342288 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eating Disorders · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsEthnic groupAotearoaPsycINFOCINAHLMEDLINEMedicinePacific islandersInclusion (mineral)GerontologyFamily medicinePsychologyPsychological interventionGender studiesPolitical sciencePsychiatrySociologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Historically, eating disorder (ED) research has largely focused on White girls and women, with minority ethnic populations underrepresented. Most research exploring EDs in minority ethnic populations has been conducted in the United States (US). The aim of this scoping review, the first of its kind, was to systematically examine research on disordered eating and EDs among minority ethnic populations in Australia, Canada, Aotearoa New Zealand and the United Kingdom (UK), four countries with shared sociocultural and healthcare characteristics. An inequity lens was applied to highlight gaps in research, access, and treatment experiences. METHOD: Five databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINHAL and Web of Science) were searched up to March 7, 2024. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts and full texts against eligibility criteria resulting in the inclusion of 87 records (76 peer-reviewed articles and 11 theses). Included studies were charted according to their focus, study design, sample characteristics and findings, with a particular focus placed on prevalence, access to treatment and treatment experience. RESULTS: The majority of identified studies were conducted in the UK (61%, 53 studies). There was a notable lack of studies investigating assessment, diagnosis and intervention. Methodologies varied, though most studies utilised cross-sectional survey designs. Most samples were non-clinical, exclusively or predominantly girls and women, and focused on adolescents and young adults. Asian populations were the most frequently studied minority ethnic group. Understanding of prevalence and treatment experience amongst minority ethnic groups was limited. CONCLUSION: There is a need for further research addressing inequities in ED prevalence, service access, and treatment experiences among minority ethnic and Indigenous groups, especially in Australia, Canada and Aotearoa New Zealand. Improved ethnicity data collection and culturally sensitive approaches to assessment, diagnosis and treatment are essential. Recommendations for future research and clinical practice are provided.

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 score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.340 · 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