Purpose <p>Physicians can play a critical role in the early identification and treatment of eating disorders (EDs), yet many report low confidence in diagnosing and managing these illnesses. ED education during medical training has the potential to improve physician’s competence in recognizing, diagnosing, and treating EDs. This study assessed the content of ED education in preclinical medical training to identify opportunities to strengthen curricula.</p> Methods <p>Slide content from 15 ED lecture presentations used between 2019 and 2024 in preclinical medical education at either Doctor of Medicine (MD) or Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO) institutions in the United States was analyzed. Through a directed qualitative content analysis, the depth and breadth of textual content were examined and the use of visual aids in slide content was assessed.</p> Results <p>Slides often acknowledged the multifactorial nature of EDs. They primarily focused on anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa, but not other EDs. Images reinforced stereotypes about who develops EDs, and there was limited mention of weight stigma as a barrier to diagnosis and treatment. Furthermore, ED treatment options, including therapeutic modalities, pharmacotherapies, and levels of care, were introduced but not described in detail.</p> Conclusion <p>Physicians are well-positioned to identify and treat EDs. However, findings suggest that significant gaps exist in the coverage of EDs in preclinical medical education. Current preclinical education may inadvertently reinforce misconceptions that hinder the ability of physicians to detect diverse presentations of EDs early. Recommendations are offered to guide future lecture development and strengthen ED-related educational content.</p> Level of evidence <p>Level V: Opinions of respected authorities, based on descriptive studies, narrative reviews, clinical experience, or reports of expert committees.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Assessing eating disorder education in U.S. medical schools: a qualitative content analysis of lecture slides

  • Agatha A. Laboe,
  • Lauren E. Pictor,
  • Mahathi Gavuji,
  • Samantha Temucin,
  • Anna Kreynin,
  • Elizabeth Sheil,
  • Brooke Jourdan,
  • Katherine Schaumberg,
  • Heather Davis,
  • Erin N. Harrop

摘要

Purpose

Physicians can play a critical role in the early identification and treatment of eating disorders (EDs), yet many report low confidence in diagnosing and managing these illnesses. ED education during medical training has the potential to improve physician’s competence in recognizing, diagnosing, and treating EDs. This study assessed the content of ED education in preclinical medical training to identify opportunities to strengthen curricula.

Methods

Slide content from 15 ED lecture presentations used between 2019 and 2024 in preclinical medical education at either Doctor of Medicine (MD) or Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO) institutions in the United States was analyzed. Through a directed qualitative content analysis, the depth and breadth of textual content were examined and the use of visual aids in slide content was assessed.

Results

Slides often acknowledged the multifactorial nature of EDs. They primarily focused on anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa, but not other EDs. Images reinforced stereotypes about who develops EDs, and there was limited mention of weight stigma as a barrier to diagnosis and treatment. Furthermore, ED treatment options, including therapeutic modalities, pharmacotherapies, and levels of care, were introduced but not described in detail.

Conclusion

Physicians are well-positioned to identify and treat EDs. However, findings suggest that significant gaps exist in the coverage of EDs in preclinical medical education. Current preclinical education may inadvertently reinforce misconceptions that hinder the ability of physicians to detect diverse presentations of EDs early. Recommendations are offered to guide future lecture development and strengthen ED-related educational content.

Level of evidence

Level V: Opinions of respected authorities, based on descriptive studies, narrative reviews, clinical experience, or reports of expert committees.