Search

BACKGROUND: Peer support involves people (mentors) using their own experiences to assist others (mentees). The impetus to include peer support in eating disorder recovery is high, however research on implementation of peer roles in eating disorder management is limited. A previous pilot study found positive but preliminary results for a Peer Mentor Program (PMP) for eating disorders. The PMP has since developed over time, including broadening its eligibility criteria and shifting to predominantly online delivery during COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the updated version of the PMP, on a larger and more diverse group of mentees. METHODS: Previously collected PMP service data from July 2020 to April 2022 (during COVID-19 lockdowns) was evaluated for fifty-one mentees using mixed methods. Data from program start (baseline), mid-point (3-months) and end (6-months) for measures of eating disorder symptoms as measured by the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q) and psychological wellbeing as measured by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) was evaluated. Frequency of eating disorder-related hospital admissions during PMP participation versus the 6 months prior, direct program costs and qualitative mentee feedback were also analysed. One way ANOVA's with post hoc tests were used to evaluate symptom change and thematic analysis was conducted on qualitative data. RESULTS: Program attendance averaged 12.12 (SD ± 1.57) of a possible 13 sessions. Statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements were demonstrated across all subscales of the eating disorder and psychological wellbeing symptom measures. EDE-Q Global score and DASS scores decreased significantly by program end. Fewer eating disorder-related hospital admissions were reported during PMP than the 6-months prior. Qualitative findings were positive and themed around the unique benefits of lived experience connection, a new kind of space for recovery, hope and motivation for

Contains fulltext : 251238.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Item does not contain fulltext

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of eating disorders is high in people with higher weight. However, despite this, eating disorders experienced by people with higher weight have been consistently under-recognised and under-treated, and there is little to guide clinicians in the management of eating disorders in this population. AIM: The aim of this guideline is to synthesise the current best practice approaches to the management of eating disorders in people with higher weight and make evidence-based clinical practice recommendations. METHODS: The National Eating Disorders Collaboration Steering Committee auspiced a Development Group for a Clinical Practice Guideline for the treatment of eating disorders for people with higher weight. The Development Group followed the 'Guidelines for Guidelines' process outlined by the National Health and Medical Research Council and aim to meet their Standards to be: 1. relevant and useful for decision making; 2. transparent; 3. overseen by a guideline development group; 4. identifying and managing conflicts of interest; 5. focused on health and related outcomes; 6. evidence informed; 7. making actionable recommendations; 8. up-to-date; and, 9. accessible. The development group included people with clinical and/or academic expertise and/or lived experience. The guideline has undergone extensive peer review and consultation over an 18-month period involving reviews by key stakeholders, including experts and organisations with clinical academic and/or lived experience. RECOMMENDATIONS: Twenty-one clinical recommendations are made and graded according to the National Health and Medical Research Council evidence levels. Strong recommendations were supported for psychological treatment as a first-line treatment approach adults (with bulimia nervosa or binge-eating disorder), adolescents and children. Clinical considerations such as weight stigma, interprofessional collaborative practice and cultural considerations are also discussed. CONCLU

As of 2020, the world has an estimated 290 million ha of planted forests and this number is continuously increasing. Of these, 131 million ha are monospecific planted forests under intensive management. Although monospecific planted forests are important in providing timber, they harbor less biodiversity and are potentially more susceptible to disturbances than natural or diverse planted forests. Here, we point out the increasing scientific evidence for increased resilience and ecosystem service provision of functionally and species diverse planted forests (hereafter referred to as diverse planted forests) compared to monospecific ones. Furthermore, we propose five concrete steps to foster the adoption of diverse planted forests: (1) improve awareness of benefits and practical options of diverse planted forests among land-owners, managers, and investors; (2) incentivize tree species diversity in public funding of afforestation and programs to diversify current maladapted planted forests of low diversity; (3) develop new wood-based products that can be derived from many different tree species not yet in use; (4) invest in research to assess landscape benefits of diverse planted forests for functional connectivity and resilience to global-change threats; and (5) improve the evidence base on diverse planted forests, in particular in currently under-represented regions, where new options could be tested.   &nbsp