Evidence Hub

Prevalence of eating disorders over the 2000-2018 period: a systematic literature review

Marie C. Galmiche, Pierre Déchelotte, Grégory Lambert, Marie‐Pierre Tavolacci

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2018

1,753 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Eating disorders (EDs) lead to multiple psychiatric and somatic complications and thus constitute a major public health concern.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to give an exhaustive view of the studies reporting the prevalence of the different EDs or total EDs and to study their evolution.

METHODS

A literature search following PRISMA Guidelines and limited to studies in English or French published between 2000 and 2018 was performed and relevant studies were included in this systematic review on the prevalence of EDs. The literature search revealed 94 studies with accurate ED diagnosis and 27 with broad ED diagnosis.

RESULTS

In 94 studies with accurate ED diagnosis, the weighted means (ranges) of lifetime ED were 8.4% (3.3-18.6%) for women and 2.2% (0.8-6.5%) for men. The weighted means (ranges) of 12-month ED prevalence were 2.2% (0.8-13.1%) for women and 0.7% (0.3-0.9%) for men. The weighted means (ranges) of point prevalence were 5.7% (0.9-13.5%) for women and 2.2% (0.2-7.3%) for men. According to continents, the weighted means (ranges) of point prevalence were 4.6% (2.0-13.5%) in America, 2.2% (0.2-13.1%) in Europe, and 3.5% (0.6-7.8%) in Asia.In addition to the former, 27 other studies reported the prevalence of EDs as broad categories resulting in weighted means (ranges) of total point prevalence of any EDs of 19.4% (6.5-36.0%) for women and 13.8% (3.6-27.1%) for men.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the complexity of integrating all ED prevalence data, the most…

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.

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