The impact of revised DSM-5 criteria on the relative distribution and inter-rater reliability of eating disorder diagnoses in a residential treatment setting

dc.contributor.authorThomas, Jennifer J.
dc.contributor.authorEddy, Kamryn T.
dc.contributor.authorMurray, Helen B.
dc.contributor.authorTromp, Marilou D. P.
dc.contributor.authorHartmann, Andrea S.
dc.contributor.authorStone, Melissa T.
dc.contributor.authorLevendusky, Philip G.
dc.contributor.authorBecker, Anne E.
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-20T10:53:39Z
dc.date.available2021-10-20T10:53:39Z
dc.date.issued2015-09-30eng
dc.description.abstractThis study evaluated the relative distribution and inter-rater reliability of revised DSM-5 criteria for eating disorders in a residential treatment program. Consecutive adolescent and young adult females (N=150) admitted to a residential eating disorder treatment facility were assigned both DSM-IV and DSM-5 diagnoses by a clinician (n=14) via routine clinical interview and a research assessor (n=4) via structured interview. We compared the frequency of diagnostic assignments under each taxonomy and by type of assessor. We evaluated concordance between clinician and researcher assignment through inter-rater reliability kappa and percent agreement. Significantly fewer patients received either clinician or researcher diagnoses of a residual eating disorder under DSM-5 (clinician-12.0%; researcher-31.3%) versus DSM-IV (clinician-28.7%; researcher-59.3%), with the majority of reassigned DSM-IV residual cases reclassified as DSM-5 anorexia nervosa. Researcher and clinician diagnoses showed moderate inter-rater reliability under DSM-IV (κ=.48) and DSM-5 (κ=.57), though agreement for specific DSM-5 other specified feeding or eating disorder (OSFED) presentations was poor (κ=.05). DSM-5 revisions were associated with significantly less frequent residual eating disorder diagnoses, but not with reduced inter-rater reliability. Findings support specific dimensions of clinical utility for revised DSM-5 criteria for eating disorders.eng
dc.description.versionpublishedeng
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.psychres.2015.06.017eng
dc.identifier.pmid26160205eng
dc.identifier.urihttps://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/55306
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.rightsterms-of-use
dc.rights.urihttps://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectDSM-5, Eating disorder, Diagnostic reliability, Other specified feeding or eating disorder (OSFED), Eating disorder not otherwise specified (EDNOS)eng
dc.subject.ddc150eng
dc.titleThe impact of revised DSM-5 criteria on the relative distribution and inter-rater reliability of eating disorder diagnoses in a residential treatment settingeng
dc.typeJOURNAL_ARTICLEeng
dspace.entity.typePublication
kops.citation.bibtex
@article{Thomas2015-09-30impac-55306,
  year={2015},
  doi={10.1016/j.psychres.2015.06.017},
  title={The impact of revised DSM-5 criteria on the relative distribution and inter-rater reliability of eating disorder diagnoses in a residential treatment setting},
  number={1-2},
  volume={229},
  issn={0165-1781},
  journal={Psychiatry Research},
  pages={517--523},
  author={Thomas, Jennifer J. and Eddy, Kamryn T. and Murray, Helen B. and Tromp, Marilou D. P. and Hartmann, Andrea S. and Stone, Melissa T. and Levendusky, Philip G. and Becker, Anne E.}
}
kops.citation.iso690THOMAS, Jennifer J., Kamryn T. EDDY, Helen B. MURRAY, Marilou D. P. TROMP, Andrea S. HARTMANN, Melissa T. STONE, Philip G. LEVENDUSKY, Anne E. BECKER, 2015. The impact of revised DSM-5 criteria on the relative distribution and inter-rater reliability of eating disorder diagnoses in a residential treatment setting. In: Psychiatry Research. Elsevier. 2015, 229(1-2), pp. 517-523. ISSN 0165-1781. eISSN 1872-7123. Available under: doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2015.06.017deu
kops.citation.iso690THOMAS, Jennifer J., Kamryn T. EDDY, Helen B. MURRAY, Marilou D. P. TROMP, Andrea S. HARTMANN, Melissa T. STONE, Philip G. LEVENDUSKY, Anne E. BECKER, 2015. The impact of revised DSM-5 criteria on the relative distribution and inter-rater reliability of eating disorder diagnoses in a residential treatment setting. In: Psychiatry Research. Elsevier. 2015, 229(1-2), pp. 517-523. ISSN 0165-1781. eISSN 1872-7123. Available under: doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2015.06.017eng
kops.citation.rdf
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/55306">
    <dc:creator>Tromp, Marilou D. P.</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Hartmann, Andrea S.</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">This study evaluated the relative distribution and inter-rater reliability of revised DSM-5 criteria for eating disorders in a residential treatment program. Consecutive adolescent and young adult females (N=150) admitted to a residential eating disorder treatment facility were assigned both DSM-IV and DSM-5 diagnoses by a clinician (n=14) via routine clinical interview and a research assessor (n=4) via structured interview. We compared the frequency of diagnostic assignments under each taxonomy and by type of assessor. We evaluated concordance between clinician and researcher assignment through inter-rater reliability kappa and percent agreement. Significantly fewer patients received either clinician or researcher diagnoses of a residual eating disorder under DSM-5 (clinician-12.0%; researcher-31.3%) versus DSM-IV (clinician-28.7%; researcher-59.3%), with the majority of reassigned DSM-IV residual cases reclassified as DSM-5 anorexia nervosa. Researcher and clinician diagnoses showed moderate inter-rater reliability under DSM-IV (κ=.48) and DSM-5 (κ=.57), though agreement for specific DSM-5 other specified feeding or eating disorder (OSFED) presentations was poor (κ=.05). DSM-5 revisions were associated with significantly less frequent residual eating disorder diagnoses, but not with reduced inter-rater reliability. Findings support specific dimensions of clinical utility for revised DSM-5 criteria for eating disorders.</dcterms:abstract>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dcterms:title>The impact of revised DSM-5 criteria on the relative distribution and inter-rater reliability of eating disorder diagnoses in a residential treatment setting</dcterms:title>
    <dc:creator>Murray, Helen B.</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Becker, Anne E.</dc:creator>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dc:contributor>Levendusky, Philip G.</dc:contributor>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dc:contributor>Tromp, Marilou D. P.</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Eddy, Kamryn T.</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Becker, Anne E.</dc:contributor>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dc:creator>Levendusky, Philip G.</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Murray, Helen B.</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Eddy, Kamryn T.</dc:contributor>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-10-20T10:53:39Z</dc:date>
    <dc:contributor>Stone, Melissa T.</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
    <dc:contributor>Thomas, Jennifer J.</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-10-20T10:53:39Z</dcterms:available>
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <dc:creator>Thomas, Jennifer J.</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:issued>2015-09-30</dcterms:issued>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/55306"/>
    <dc:creator>Stone, Melissa T.</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Hartmann, Andrea S.</dc:contributor>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
kops.flag.isPeerReviewedtrueeng
kops.flag.knbibliographyfalse
kops.sourcefieldPsychiatry Research. Elsevier. 2015, <b>229</b>(1-2), pp. 517-523. ISSN 0165-1781. eISSN 1872-7123. Available under: doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2015.06.017deu
kops.sourcefield.plainPsychiatry Research. Elsevier. 2015, 229(1-2), pp. 517-523. ISSN 0165-1781. eISSN 1872-7123. Available under: doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2015.06.017deu
kops.sourcefield.plainPsychiatry Research. Elsevier. 2015, 229(1-2), pp. 517-523. ISSN 0165-1781. eISSN 1872-7123. Available under: doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2015.06.017eng
relation.isAuthorOfPublication6ba48e67-0b89-41fa-8ccd-b57bd02ce171
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery6ba48e67-0b89-41fa-8ccd-b57bd02ce171
source.bibliographicInfo.fromPage517eng
source.bibliographicInfo.issue1-2eng
source.bibliographicInfo.toPage523eng
source.bibliographicInfo.volume229eng
source.identifier.eissn1872-7123eng
source.identifier.issn0165-1781eng
source.periodicalTitlePsychiatry Researcheng
source.publisherElseviereng

Dateien