Objective In 2015, the Academy for Eating Disorders (AED) collaborated with international patient, advocacy, and parent organizations to craft the “Nine Truths About Eating Disorders.” This document has been translated into over 30 languages and has been distributed globally to replace outdated and erroneous stereotypes about eating disorders with factual information. In this paper, we review the state of the science supporting the Nine Truths. Methods The literature supporting each of the Nine Truths was reviewed, summarized, and richly annotated. Results Most of the Nine Truths arise from well-established foundations in the scientific literature. Additional evidence is required to further substantiate some of the assertions in the document. Future investigations are needed in all areas to deepen our understanding of eating disorders, their causes, and their treatments. Conclusions The “Nine Truths About Eating Disorders” is a guiding document to accelerate global dissemination of accurate and evidence-informed information about eating disorders.

ObjectiveTo evaluate associations between binge‐eating disorder (BED) and somatic illnesses and determine whether medical comorbidities are more common in individuals who present with BED and comorbid obesity.MethodCases (n = 850) were individuals with a BED diagnosis in the Swedish eating disorders quality registers. Ten community controls were matched to each case on sex, and year, month, and county of birth. Associations of BED status with neurologic, immune, respiratory, gastrointestinal, skin, musculoskeletal, genitourinary, circulatory, and endocrine system diseases were evaluated using conditional logistic regression models. We further examined these associations by adjusting for lifetime psychiatric comorbidity. Amongst individuals with BED, we explored whether comorbid obesity was associated with risk of somatic disorders.ResultsBED was associated with most classes of diseases evaluated; strongest associations were with diabetes [odds ratio (95% confidence interval) = 5.7 (3.8; 8.7)] and circulatory systems [1.9 (1.3; 2.7)], likely indexing components of metabolic syndrome. Amongst individuals with BED, those with comorbid obesity were more likely to have a lifetime history of respiratory [1.5 (1.1; 2.1)] and gastrointestinal [2.6 (1.7; 4.1)] diseases than those without comorbid obesity. Increased risk of some somatic disease classes in individuals with BED was not simply due to obesity or other lifetime psychiatric comorbidity.DiscussionThe association of BED with many somatic illnesses highlights the morbidity experienced by individuals with BED. Clinicians treating patients with BED should be vigilant for medical comorbidities. Nonpsychiatric providers may be the first clinical contact for those with BED underscoring the importance of screening in primary care. © 2016 The Authors International Journal of Eating Disorders Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (Int J Eat Disord 2017; 50:58–65)

Individuals with BED had substantially higher healthcare utilization and costs in the years prior to and after diagnosis of BED. Since previous research shows a delay in diagnosis, findings indicate clear opportunities for earlier detection and clinical management. Training of providers in detection, diagnosis, and management may help curtail morbidity. A reduction in healthcare utilization was observed after BED diagnosis. This suggests that earlier diagnosis and treatment could improve long-term health outcomes and reduce the economic burden associated with BED.

Objective Eating disorders commonly co‐occur with gastrointestinal problems. This case–control study aimed to (a) document the prevalence of disorders of gut‐brain interaction (DGBI) in eating disorders, (b) examine the specific impact of disordered eating behaviors on the risk of DGBI, and (c) explore the impact of current eating disorder psychopathology on DGBI. Method We included 765 cases with eating disorders and 1,240 controls. DGBI were assessed via the ROME III questionnaire. Prevalences of DGBI were calculated across eating disorder diagnoses (anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and multiple eating disorders) and in controls. The association between disordered eating behaviors and DGBI was examined using logistic regression models. Lastly, we compared the total number of DGBI in individuals with high versus low current eating disorder symptoms. Results A large majority (88.2–95.5%) of individuals with eating disorders reported at least one DGBI and 34.8–48.7% reported three or more DGBI. Of the DGBI categories, functional bowel disorders were the most commonly endorsed category, and of the individual DGBI, irritable bowel syndrome was the most frequently reported (43.9–58.8%). All investigated disordered eating behaviors showed a positive association with most DGBI categories. Finally, individuals reporting high current eating disorder symptoms reported higher mean number of DGBI (3.03–3.34) than those with low current symptoms (1.60–1.84). Discussion The directionality and mechanisms underlying the nature of the relationship between gastrointestinal and eating disorder symptoms is worthy of further study and clinicians should adopt an integrated approach by attending to both gastrointestinal and eating disorder symptoms in their patients.

Background IMPROVE aims to conduct a hybrid type 3 evaluation design to test the effectiveness of bundled implementation strategies on intervention fidelity of the Healthy School Start (HSS) program, while simultaneously monitoring effects on health outcomes of children and parents. The HSS is a 4-component family support program for children starting school (5–7 years of age) promoting healthy dietary habits and physical activity in the home environment to prevent childhood obesity and parents’ risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Methods IMPROVE is a cluster-randomized controlled trial with two arms to evaluate and compare the effects of two different bundles of implementation strategies on intervention fidelity expressed as adherence and responsiveness at 12 and 24 months (primary outcomes). Thirty schools in two municipalities will participate in the study reaching about 1400 families per school year. In stakeholder workshops, key implementation determinants were identified according to the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Through a consensus process with stakeholders, two bundles of implementation strategies were tailored to address context-specific determinants. Schools randomly assigned to group 1 will receive bundle 1 (Basic) and group 2 will receive bundle 1 + 2 (Enhanced). Bundle 2 consists of external facilitation, fidelity monitoring and feedback strategies. Secondary outcomes will include change in acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and organisational readiness as perceived by school staff. In addition, child weight status and diet, and parents’ feeding practices and risk of type 2 diabetes will be monitored. Linear and ordinal regression analysis will be used to test the effect on the primary and secondary outcomes, taking clustering and covariates into consideration where needed. Process evaluation will be conducted through key stakeholder interviews to investigate experiences of the program and perceptions on sustainability. Discussion This systematic approach to investigating the effectiveness of two different bundles of implementation strategies tailored to context-specific determinants on the fidelity of the HSS intervention will provide new insight into feasible implementation strategies and external support needed for the HSS to be effective and sustainable. Results will help inform how to bridge the gap between the research on school-based health programs and routine practice in schools. Trial registration Registered prospectively at ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04984421, registered July 30, 2021