Evidence Hub

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of eating disorder preventative interventions in schools

S. L. Berry, Amy L. Burton, Kris Rogers, Carissa M. Lee, David Berle

European eating disorders review, 2024

7,935 participants · 12 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objective Adolescents are particularly susceptible to developing an eating disorder (ED). Therefore, schools are in a unique position to assist in the prevention of EDs for this vulnerable group. To ascertain the current evidence‐base for school‐based ED prevention efforts, we conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials that delivered a school‐based ED prevention intervention and assessed the impact these interventions had on ED symptomatology. Method Electronic databases (PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and CENTRAL) were searched for published randomised controlled trials of school‐based ED prevention interventions from inception to 2024. Twelve studies from 11 articles were identified with 7935 participants (mean ages ranging from 12 to 17). Of these studies, six were included in meta‐analyses. Results Media literacy and dissonance‐based interventions reported small to medium effects for ED symptomatology compared to controls at post‐intervention. At three‐to‐six‐month follow‐up, intervention groups reported small negative to medium‐sized positive effects compared to control groups on eating disorder symptomatology. Conclusions While school‐based ED prevention interventions can effectively reduce ED symptomatology post‐intervention, the programs analysed in this review do not reliably demonstrate effectiveness across groups and time. Future research should build upon current interventions to increase…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, 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. Reported size: 7,935 participants or records.

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