The primary goal of the Science of Eating Disorders (SEDs) blog is to make sense of the findings in eating disorder research for those who may lack expertise, access, or time required to read scholarly literature. At its core, SEDs is dedicated to translating and critically appraising peer-reviewed ED literature. SEDs contributors have a wide range of expertise and educational backgrounds, but all share a common desire to summarize and critically evaluate eating disorder research, without “dumbing it down.”
Although called the Science of Eating Disorders, the blog covers a wide range of topics relevant to eating disorders: from genetics, psychology, and neuroscience, to treatment, public understanding, medical complications, and much more.
Besides the requirement that all blog posts must provide a critical perspective on a peer-reviewed research article (or a group of articles)*, there are two factors limiting blog content: expertise and interests of the contributors. This means that that the more contributors the are, the more diversity in content, viewpoints, and writing styles.
*I’m also fine with posts reviewing/commenting on ED-related conferences.
WHAT’S IN IT FOR YOU?
Arguably exposure: Currently, the blog received an average of 1000 hits on any given day (more if a post has been recently published, less if one hasn’t been published in a while) and has about 500 email subscribers. The SEDs-associated Twitter and Tumblr have about 1,750 and 3,000 followers, respectively. The Facebook page about 2,000 likes.
Of course, you’ll also probably improve your writing skills in the process.
SO, WHAT AM I LOOKING FOR?
I’m looking for individuals who
- write well
- and think critically.
Having said that, being able to critically appraise an article is a much more important skill to have if you want to contribute to SEDs. I can improve your writing and make it more blog and/or lay-person friendly, but I cannot do the critical thinking for you.
At the moment, I am particularly looking for contributors with backgrounds in:
- health economics,
- and/or population genetics.
I am more likely to say “yes” to people if I feel the content they want to contribute is different from what others are writing about; conversely, I am more likely to say “no” to people who are interested in writing about topics that are already sufficiently covered on the blog (e.g., qualitative research).
YOU MIGHT BE WONDERING…
Do I have to use my real name?
No. You can use a pseudonym.
Are there minimum requirements for how often I would have to contribute?
No. You can post as frequently or infrequently as you wish. You don’t have to many any commitments. At all.
Do I need to get a paper/topic I want to write about “pre-approved”?
Generally, no. You can write about what interests you, but you should check whether that paper has been written about before (here) and what else has been said on the topic. If the topic is something that has not been covered before and/or is not easily categorized as “science”, you should check with me. Chances are, however, that if it’s about peer-reviewed literature and can fit into any of the ‘topics’ listed on this website (on the right), I will say “go for it.” That said, you have to be open to criticism.
Do I have to have (or have had) an eating disorder?
I’d prefer it, but it is more important to me that you are interested in blogging about peer-reviewed research and are passionate about demystifying jargon-laden specialized literature for non-experts or busy experts (i.e., knowledge translation).
Do I have to have access to peer-reviewed research?
It would be beneficial if you have university/institutional access to papers that are behind a paywall, but more and more papers are becoming available through open access journals and PMC, so it is not a problem if you don’t have institutional access.
DOES THAT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING YOU WOULD BE INTERESTED IN?
If so, please complete and submit the form below to get in touch (* = required):