RESUMO
Background: Obesity is highly stigmatized, with negative obesity-related stereotypes widespread across society. Internalized weight stigma (IWS) is linked to negative outcomes including poor mental health and disordered eating. Previous evidence examining population groups at higher risk of experiencing IWS comes from small, nonrepresentative samples. Here, we re-assess previously reported associations of IWS with demographic, socioeconomic, and wider social factors in a large general population birth cohort study for the first time. Methods: In the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), we explored differences in IWS at age 31 years by sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic factors, sexual orientation, and family and wider social influences, using confounder-adjusted multivariable regression. Findings: In models adjusted for potential confounders and BMI in childhood, adolescence, and adulthood (N = 4060), IWS was higher for females (standardized beta: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.61), sexual minorities (0.17 S.D. higher, 95% CI: 0.09, 0.24), and less socioeconomically advantaged individuals (e.g., 0.16 S.D. higher (95% CI: 0.08, 0.24) for participants whose mothers had minimum or no qualifications, compared to a university degree). The social environment during adolescence and young adulthood was important: IWS was higher for people who at age 13 years felt pressure to lose weight from family (by 0.13 S.D., 95% CI: 0.03, 0.23), and the media (by 0.17, 95% CI: 0.10, 0.25), or had experienced bullying (e.g., 0.25 S.D., 95% CI: 0.17, 0.33 for bullying at age 23 years). Interpretation: Internalized weight stigma differs substantially between demographic groups. Risk is elevated for females, sexual minorities, and socioeconomically disadvantaged adults, and this is not explained by differences in BMI. Pressure to lose weight from family and the media in adolescence may have long-lasting effects on IWS. Funding: The ESRC, MRC, NIHR, and Wellcome Trust.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Smartphone applications (apps) are proliferating and health-related apps are particularly popular. The aim of this study was to identify, characterize, and evaluate the clinical utility of apps designed either for people with eating disorders or for eating disorder professionals. METHOD: A search of the major app stores identified 805 potentially relevant apps, of which 39 were primarily designed for people with eating disorders and five for professionals. RESULTS: The apps for people with eating disorders had four main functions. Most common was the provision of advice, the quality of which ranged from sound to potentially harmful. Five apps included self-assessment tools but only two used methods that would generally be viewed as reliable. Four apps had the self-monitoring of eating habits as a major feature. Entering information into these apps could be accomplished with varying degrees of ease, but viewing it was more difficult. One app allowed the transfer of information between patients and clinicians. DISCUSSION: The enthusiasm for apps outstrips the evidence supporting their use. Given their popularity, it is suggested that clinicians evaluate app use as part of routine assessment. The clinical utility of the existing apps is not clear. Some are capable of tracking key features over time, but none has the functions required for analytic self-monitoring as in cognitive behavioral treatments. The full potential of apps has yet to be realized. Specialized apps could be designed to augment various forms of treatment, and there is the possibility that they could deliver an entire personalized intervention.
