↓ Skip to main content

Cognitive biases in response to visual body-related stimuli in eating disorders: study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cognitive biases in response to visual body-related stimuli in eating disorders: study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Systematic Reviews, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13643-015-0093-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathrin Schuck, Simone Munsch, Silvia Schneider

Abstract

Biased processing of body-related information may be linked to the development and maintenance of eating disorders (ED). The objective of this systematic review will be to examine the occurrence and the extent of cognitive biases in response to visual body-related stimuli in individuals with ED and individuals with an increased risk to develop ED. Studies will be identified by searching MEDLINE and PsycINFO. We will include observational and experimental studies that examine the association between cognitive biases (information processing biases) in response to visual body-related stimuli and eating-related pathology in clinical and non-clinical adult samples. In addition to database searches, citation tracking will be used. Two reviewers will first screen titles and abstracts independently and will then review full texts for eligibility. Data extraction will be done independently by two reviewers. Conflicts at all levels of screening and extraction will be resolved through discussion. Studies will be included if they 1) assess cognitive biases (i.e., attentional biases, memory biases, judgment biases, response biases, and interpretation biases) in response to visual body-related stimuli (i.e., pictures or photographs of a human body or a human body shape), 2) if they report associations between biases and eating-related pathology, 3) if study participants are at least 16 years or older, and 4) if no priming task was administered prior to the assessment. Descriptive data of studies will also be collected. Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers. Data will be analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis. This systematic review will synthesize the evidence for cognitive bias in response to visual body-related stimuli in individuals with ED and individuals with an increased risk of developing an ED. The findings may help to better understand information processing in eating-related psychopathology. PROSPERO CRD42015019165.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 24%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 19%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 46%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 6 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 August 2015.
All research outputs
#3,934,696
of 5,565,912 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#394
of 472 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,647
of 192,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#24
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,565,912 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 472 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 192,344 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.