Screening for eating disorders and high-risk behavior: Caution
β Scribed by Jacobi, Corinna ;Abascal, Liana ;Taylor, C. Barr
- Publisher
- Wiley (John Wiley & Sons)
- Year
- 2004
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 119 KB
- Volume
- 36
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0276-3478
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
β¦ Synopsis
Abstract
Objective
The current study reviews the state of eating disorder screens.
Methods
Screens were classified by their purported screening function: identification of cases with (a) anorexia nervosa only; (b) bulimia nervosa only; (c) eating disorders in general; (d) partial syndrome, eating disorder not otherwise specified (EDNOS), or subclinical; (e) not aβd but at high risk. Information is presented on development, psychometric properties, and external validation (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values).
Results
Screens differ widely with regard to objective, psychometric properties and the validation methodology used. Most screens that identify cases are not appropriate for the identification of atβrisk behaviors. Little data on the external validity of screens are available.
Discussion
Screens should be used with caution. A sequential procedure, in which subjects identified as being at risk during the first stage is followed by more specific diagnostic tests during the second stage, might overcome some of the limitations of the oneβstage screening approach. Β© 2004 by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Int J Eat Disord 36: 280β295, 2004.
π SIMILAR VOLUMES
Objective: To assess whether high school athletes are at risk for an eating disorder, whether personality characteristics differentiate athletes from nonathletes, and whether high levels of perfectionism put athletes at risk. Method: 318 high school athletes were randomly matched to 360 nonathletes.
The present study examined the eating behaviour and eating disorders of Austrian dietitians. Questionnaires were distributed to 500 Austrian dietitians and completed by 320 (64 per cent) subjects. Of the entire sample, 21 (6.6 per cent) of the dietitians were underweight, more than two-thirds normal