MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412752146 · doi:10.1186/s40337-025-01351-6

Considerations for informing precision psychiatry in eating disorders: Foundations for future practice

2025· letter· en· W4412752146 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole Obeid, Niana Lavallée, Abigail H. M. Bradley, Mark L. Norris

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eating Disorders · 2025
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEating disordersPsychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eating disorders (EDs) are multisystemic, debilitating, and complex illnesses that affect many young Canadians. These disorders are associated with high rates of medical complications, psychiatric and physical comorbidities, functional impairment, family distress, and financial burden. Despite the severity and increasing prevalence of EDs in youth, advancements in understandings of the pathophysiology and treatment of EDs have remained limited over the past three decades. This trend may be shaped by the chronic underfunding of the field, reliance on small sampled cross-sectional studies, and the notable lack of research focused on youth with EDs from historically underrepresented communities. Current treatment practices demonstrate modest efficacy and often omit the complex, heterogeneous presentations, development, and maintenance of pediatric EDs. Large-scale, multiaxial datasets are necessary to elucidate ED etiology and enable phenotyping. This is a critical step towards implementing future precision psychiatry and personalized treatment advances. In this commentary, we share our experience of conceptualizing a precision ED data and bio-registry, EDBioMAP: Eating Disorder Bio-Registry and Multiaxial Precision Health Platform, and suggest necessary pillars to inform, implement, and drive the successful use of precision psychiatry in pediatric ED care. Effective data utilization requires actionable steps and includes: (1) establishing strategic partnerships; (2) incorporating measurement-based care into clinical practice; (3) collecting novel biological markers; (4) developing minimum datasets; and (5) leveraging predictive modelling techniques. Strategic and standardized data integration is imperative to informing the future use of precision psychiatry for EDs. It can lend well to igniting multi-site collaboration to enhance large datasets necessary for this type of work and offers avenues for future development of personalized treatment interventions and clinical decision-making tools for youth with EDs.

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)0.198
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.419
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1980.419
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.031
Scholarly communication0.0180.038
Open science0.0090.015
Research integrity0.0250.053
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.341 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Eating DisordersSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207