MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412698241 · doi:10.1186/s40337-025-01347-2

Pandemic impact, mitigation strategies and peer support: a qualitative analysis of youth, parent, clinician and administrator perspectives

2025· article· en· W4412698241 on OpenAlex
Jennifer Couturier, Maria Nicula, Cheryl Webb, Gina Dimitropoulos, Nicole Obeid, Melissa Kimber, Techiya Loewen, Anne Coolen, Erica Crews, Shaleen Jones, Cendrine Tremblay, Wendy Preskow, Gail McVey, Lori Wozney

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eating Disorders · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of CalgaryEngineering Link (Canada)Association of Canadian College and University Teachers of EnglishUniversity of OttawaMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsQualitative researchPeer supportPeer reviewQualitative analysisPsychologyPandemicPolitical scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study describes views on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on eating disorder symptoms in youth, as well as the impact on care, and the possibility of peer support as a mitigating strategy from the perspectives of youth and parents with lived experience with eating disorders, as well as clinicians and administrators. A national purposive sample was recruited through websites and social media platforms. Those recruited were asked to complete a demographic questionnaire and to partake in an individual, virtual, semi-structured qualitative interview. Guided by a qualitative descriptive approach, interview data was transcribed and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Fifteen parents (93% female; age 48.9 ± 6.9 years), 14 youth (93% female; age 15.3 ± 1.2 years), 16 clinicians (93.8% female; age 41.19 ± 15.7) and 12 administrators (83.3% female; age 47.75 ± 12.2 years) participated. Thirteen parents (87%) said they would attend a parent peer support group and all 15 (100%) said it should be offered routinely in community and hospital settings delivering eating disorder care. Benefits and risks were discussed by participants. Youth, clinicians and administrators agreed that parental peer support groups would be helpful but were not as convinced that youth peer support groups would be beneficial to youth with eating disorders. Those with lived experience view parental peer support as beneficial and feel it should be offered routinely. Clinicians and administrators also voiced support for parental peer support with certain caveats regarding training and oversight. This study describes views on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the possibility of peer support as a mitigating strategy from the perspectives of those with lived experience with eating disorders, as well as clinicians and administrators. Through qualitative interviews, those with lived experience view parental peer support as beneficial and feel it should be offered routinely. Clinicians and administrators voiced support with conditions of training and oversight.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.412 · 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