Evidence Hub

Body checking and body avoidance in eating disorders: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Nikodijevic A, Buck K, Fuller-Tyszkiewicz M, de Paoli T, Krug I

European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association, 2018

Abstract

This review sought to systematically review and quantify the evidence related to body checking and body avoidance in eating disorders (EDs) to gauge the size of effects, as well as examine potential differences between clinical and nonclinical populations, and between different ED subtypes. PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, PsycEXTRA, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE databases were searched for academic literature published until October 2017. A grey literature search was also conducted. Fifty-two studies were identified for the systematic review, of which 34 were eligible for meta-analysis. Only female samples were included in the meta-analysis. ED cases experienced significantly higher body checking (d = 1.26, p < .001) and body avoidance (d = 1.88, p < .001) overall relative to healthy controls, but neither behaviour varied by ED subtype. In nonclinical samples, body checking (r = .60) and body avoidance (r = .56) were significantly correlated with ED pathology (p < .001). These findings support transdiagnostic theoretical models and approaches to ED treatment and early intervention programmes.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free