The current clinical approach to feeding and eating disorders aimed to increase personalization of management

Date published: 15/01/25
Authors: Ulrike H Schmidt, Angelica Claudino, Fernando Fernández-Aranda, Katrin E Giel, Jess Griffiths, Phillipa J Hay, Youl-Ri Kim, Jane Marshall, Nadia Micali, Alessio Maria Monteleone, Michiko Nakazato, Joanna Steinglass, Tracey D Wade, Stephen Wonderlich, Stephan Zipfel, Karina L Allen, Helen Sharpe
Published in: World Psychiatry

Objective

Feeding and eating disorders (FEDs) are a heterogeneous grouping of disorders at the mind-body interface, with typical onset from childhood into emerging adulthood. They occur along a spectrum of disordered eating and compensatory weight management behaviors, and from low to high body weight. Psychiatric comorbidities are the norm. In contrast to other major psychiatric disorders, first-line treatments for FEDs are mainly psychological and/or nutrition-focused, with medications playing a minor adjunctive role. Patients, carers and clinicians all have identified personalization of treatment as a priority. Yet, for all FEDs, the evidence base supporting this personalization is limited. Importantly, disordered eating and related behaviors can have serious physical consequences and may put the patient's life at risk. In these cases, immediate safety and risk management considerations may at least for a period need to be prioritized over other efforts at personalization of care. This paper systematically reviews several key domains that may be relevant to the characterization of the individual patient with a FED aimed at personalization of management. 


Method

These domains include symptom profile, clinical subtypes, severity, clinical staging, physical complications and consequences, antecedent and concomitant psychiatric conditions, social functioning and quality of life, neurocognition, social cognition and emotion, dysfunctional cognitive schemata, personality traits, family history, early environmental exposures, recent environmental exposures, stigma, and protective factors. Where possible, validated assessment measures for use in clinical practice are identified.


Conclusions

The limitations of the current evidence are pointed out, and possible directions for future research are highlighted. These also include novel and emerging approaches aimed at providing more fine-grained and sophisticated ways to personalize treatment of FEDs, such as those that utilize neurobiological markers. We additionally outline remote measurement technologies designed to delineate patients’ illness and recovery trajectories and facilitate development of novel intervention approaches.

More publications

Sign up to our mailing list

If you sign up to our mailing list you will be the first to hear updates about what we have been doing, any recent publications and opportunities to be part of the network and participate in our research.

Sign up to mailing list
EDAC icon

Need help, support or info?

EDAC is a research network but we can direct you to support options.