Evidence Hub

Efficacy of the Intervention Against the Stigmatization of Men With Eating Disorders in Primary Healthcare (iSMEsH): Results From a Randomized Waitlist-Controlled Study

Lehe MS, Halbeisen G, Steins-Loeber S, Paslakis G

The International journal of eating disorders, 2026

292 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Objective: Eating disorders (EDs) in men are underdiagnosed and undertreated, partly due to stigma hindering help-seeking. This randomized waitlist-controlled study tested the efficacy of the iSMEsH online anti-stigma intervention targeting German general practitioners (GPs) and medical students. The program aimed to reduce stigmatizing attitudes toward men with EDs and improve knowledge and self-efficacy in managing ED symptoms.

Method: A total of 292 participants (130 GPs, 162 medical students) were randomly assigned to immediate intervention or waitlist control. The intervention consisted of six video-based, on-demand modules co-developed with men who have lived experience of an ED, combining education and contact-based strategies. Outcomes included cognitive stigma (knowledge), affective stigma (biased attitudes), and behavioral stigma (treatment self-efficacy), assessed at three timepoints.

Results: The iSMEsH anti-stigma intervention significantly increased knowledge of male-specific ED presentations and enhanced treatment self-efficacy in both GP and medical student populations. Effects on affective stigma were less consistent.

Discussion: Findings support the efficacy of the iSMEsH anti-stigma intervention in improving knowledge and treatment self-efficacy regarding EDs in men among healthcare professionals. Effects on affective stigma were limited and may require longer follow-up periods to be comprehensively captured. The intervention shows promise as a scalable…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 292 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