Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Publications attracting public attention are not necessarily those achieving high scholarly impact, yet little is known about how public and academic audiences engage with feeding and eating disorder research. This study compared publications receiving high public attention and scholarly impact among publications indexed under the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) term “Feeding and Eating Disorders” in PubMed between 2014–2023. Public attention was assessed using Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS), and scholarly impact was measured using citations per year (CPY). The 20 highest-ranked publications by each metric were compared in terms of MeSH term profiles and thematic focus. A total of 13,175 publications were identified. Core MeSH terms, including humans, female, male, adult, feeding and eating disorders, and anorexia nervosa, were common to both groups, whereas adolescent, young adult, and COVID-19 appeared only among publications receiving high public attention. Publications attracting public attention frequently focused on socially visible and timely issues, whereas highly cited publications more often contributed to epidemiological evidence and understanding of biological and psychological mechanisms. These findings suggest that public and academic audiences prioritise different aspects of feeding and eating disorder research. Considering both public attention and scholarly impact may improve understanding of how scientific evidence enters public discourse.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: