This review provides an update to a previous Evidence Base Update addressing behavioral treatments for overweight and obesity in children and adolescents. Articles were identified through a systematic search of the biomedical literature in PubMed/MEDLINE (1946-), Elsevier EMBASE (1947-), SCOPUS (1823-), Clarivate Web of Science Core Collection (WOS, 1900-), PsycINFO (1800-), The Cochrane Library and Clinicaltrials.gov published between June 2014 and August 2022. Family-based treatment (FBT) remains a well-established treatment for overweight and obesity in children and is now well-established in adolescents and toddlers. Parent-only behavioral treatment remains well-established in children and is now well-established among adolescents and children. Possibly effective treatments continue to include FBT-parent only for adolescents, and behavioral weight loss (BWL) with a family component for adolescents, children, and toddlers. Several variations of FBT and BWL can now be considered possibly effective including FBT+motivational interviewing, FBT+social facilitation maintenance, group-based FBT, low-dose FBT, BWL+stress management, and camp-based BWL. Cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) for adolescents also met criteria for possibly effective treatments. Current research has also established that behavioral treatments can be effectively delivered in alternative settings (e.g. primary care) and through alternative mediums (e.g. telehealth). Research continues to support the use of multicomponent lifestyle interventions in accordance with recent recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, and the United State Preventative Services Task Force. However, more work is needed to ensure appropriate access for children with comorbid medical and psychiatric disorders and children from socially, politically, and economically marginalized groups.

Body image disturbance and eating disorders are rising all over the world. However, little is known about experiences of body image in men across cultural groups, and measurement tools often fail to account for the profound ways in which culture and gender can affect these data. An American cultural model of the ideal male body was compared with that of South Koreans using cultural domain analysis and residual agreement analysis. Cultural domain analysis gives researchers the ability to systematically study cultural models based on informants’ emic understanding of phenomena; residual agreement analysis evaluates the patterns of agreement in disagreement with a larger cultural model. This study shows that Americans and South Koreans often overlap in their assessments of the desirability of male bodily features; however, they also strongly endorse many differing features, as well as similar features for different cultural reasons. For example, Americans endorse muscularity because it indexes physical prowess and health; South Koreans only sometimes endorse muscularity, mainly as an aesthetic choice. As a result, psychometric tools for measuring body dissatisfaction that are uncritically adopted for use in cross-cultural research may miss important information affecting the validity of findings and the efficacy of prevention campaigns and treatment plans.