Cited by 43Eating Disorders and BehaviorsNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Feedback-Based Treatments for Eating Disorders and Related Symptoms: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Open access
Imperatori, Claudio, Mancini, Miranda, Della Marca, Giacomo, Valenti, Enrico Maria, Farina, Benedetto·2018·Nutrients

Abstract

The effectiveness of biofeedback and neurofeedback has been investigated in a range of psychiatric disorders. However, to date, there are few studies on the clinical usefulness of feedback-based techniques for eating disorders (EDs) and EDs-related symptoms (e.g., food craving). A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus and PsychINFO identified 162 articles. Among these, thirteen studies exploring the therapeutic use of biofeedback and neurofeedback in EDs or EDs-related symptoms were included. Biofeedback and neurofeedback were implemented respectively in five and eight of all reviewed articles. No studies incorporated different feedback modalities or both biofeedback and neurofeedback. The considered studies provide preliminary data of the usefulness of feedback-based techniques in the treatment of several dysfunctional eating behaviors (e.g., food craving, rumination). Although no significant effect has been reported for other important EDs-related symptoms (i.e., body image disturbance), feedback-based techniques are also associated with significant modifications of both sympathetic reaction to food-related stimuli and brain activity in several regions of the reward system (e.g., insula). Taken together the results of the present review suggest that feedback-based treatments may be useful in the treatment of several dysfunctional eating behaviors operating both on top-down and bottom-up individual coping strategies. Methodological and clinical issues are also discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/nu10111806

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [68]Higgins J.P.T. Altman D.G. Sterne J.A.C. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 Higgins J.P.T. Green S. The Cochrane Collaboration London, UK 2011

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Imperatori, C., Mancini, M., Della Marca, G., Valenti, E. M., & Farina, B.
Affiliations
  • European University of Rome (IT)
  • Sleep Disorders Unit, Institute of Neurology, Catholic University, 00153 Rome, Italy
Corresponding author
Imperatori, Claudio
Venue
Nutrients
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2018-11-20
Volume
10
Issue
11
Pages
1806
ISSN
2072-6643 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2901795049
Cited by
43
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5
FWCI
0.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nutrients (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
eating disorders, biofeedback, neurofeedback, food cravings, rumination, body image disturbance, dysfunctional eating behaviors, reward systems, insula, sympathetic response, coping strategies
MeSH terms
Feeding and Eating Disorders, Biofeedback, Psychology, Body Image, Electroencephalography, Feeding Behavior, Food, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Neurofeedback, Craving

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review