Do DSM-5 eating disorder criteria overpathologize normative eating patterns among individuals with obesity?
Do DSM-5 eating disorder criteria overpathologize normative eating patterns among individuals with obesity?
Date
2014
Authors
Thomas, Jennifer J.
Koh, Katherine A.
Eddy, Kamryn T.
Murray, Helen B.
Gorman, Mark J.
Sogg, Stephanie
Becker, Anne E.
Editors
Journal ISSN
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliographical data
Publisher
Series
URI (citable link)
DOI (citable link)
International patent number
Link to the license
EU project number
Project
Open Access publication
Collections
Title in another language
Publication type
Journal article
Publication status
Published
Published in
Journal of obesity ; 2014 (2014). - 320803. - Hindawi Publishing Corporation. - ISSN 2090-0708. - eISSN 2090-0716
Abstract
Background. DSM-5 revisions have been criticized in the popular press for overpathologizing normative eating patterns—particularly among individuals with obesity. To evaluate the evidence for this and other DSM-5 critiques, we compared the point prevalence and interrater reliability of DSM-IV versus DSM-5 eating disorders (EDs) among adults seeking weight-loss treatment. Method. Clinicians () assigned DSM-IV and DSM-5 ED diagnoses to 100 participants via routine clinical interview. Research assessors () independently conferred ED diagnoses via Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV and a DSM-5 checklist. Results. Research assessors diagnosed a similar proportion of participants with EDs under DSM-IV (29%) versus DSM-5 (32%). DSM-5 research diagnoses included binge eating disorder (9%), bulimia nervosa (2%), subthreshold binge eating disorder (5%), subthreshold bulimia nervosa (2%), purging disorder (1%), night eating syndrome (6%), and other (7%). Interrater reliability between clinicians and research assessors was “substantial” for both DSM-IV ( = 0.64, 84% agreement) and DSM-5 ( = 0.63, 83% agreement). Conclusion. DSM-5 ED criteria can be reliably applied in an obesity treatment setting and appear to yield an overall ED point prevalence comparable to DSM-IV.
Summary in another language
Subject (DDC)
150 Psychology
Keywords
Conference
Review
undefined / . - undefined, undefined. - (undefined; undefined)
Cite This
ISO 690
THOMAS, Jennifer J., Katherine A. KOH, Kamryn T. EDDY, Andrea S. HARTMANN, Helen B. MURRAY, Mark J. GORMAN, Stephanie SOGG, Anne E. BECKER, 2014. Do DSM-5 eating disorder criteria overpathologize normative eating patterns among individuals with obesity?. In: Journal of obesity. Hindawi Publishing Corporation. 2014, 320803. ISSN 2090-0708. eISSN 2090-0716. Available under: doi: 10.1155/2014/320803BibTex
@article{Thomas2014eatin-55653, year={2014}, doi={10.1155/2014/320803}, title={Do DSM-5 eating disorder criteria overpathologize normative eating patterns among individuals with obesity?}, volume={2014}, issn={2090-0708}, journal={Journal of obesity}, author={Thomas, Jennifer J. and Koh, Katherine A. and Eddy, Kamryn T. and Hartmann, Andrea S. and Murray, Helen B. and Gorman, Mark J. and Sogg, Stephanie and Becker, Anne E.}, note={Article Number: 320803} }
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/123456789/55653"> <dc:contributor>Sogg, Stephanie</dc:contributor> <dc:contributor>Murray, Helen B.</dc:contributor> <dc:contributor>Gorman, Mark J.</dc:contributor> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/> <dc:contributor>Becker, Anne E.</dc:contributor> <dcterms:title>Do DSM-5 eating disorder criteria overpathologize normative eating patterns among individuals with obesity?</dcterms:title> <dc:creator>Thomas, Jennifer J.</dc:creator> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <dc:creator>Sogg, Stephanie</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Koh, Katherine A.</dc:creator> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-11-25T12:28:23Z</dcterms:available> <dc:contributor>Hartmann, Andrea S.</dc:contributor> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Background. DSM-5 revisions have been criticized in the popular press for overpathologizing normative eating patterns—particularly among individuals with obesity. To evaluate the evidence for this and other DSM-5 critiques, we compared the point prevalence and interrater reliability of DSM-IV versus DSM-5 eating disorders (EDs) among adults seeking weight-loss treatment. Method. Clinicians () assigned DSM-IV and DSM-5 ED diagnoses to 100 participants via routine clinical interview. Research assessors () independently conferred ED diagnoses via Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV and a DSM-5 checklist. Results. Research assessors diagnosed a similar proportion of participants with EDs under DSM-IV (29%) versus DSM-5 (32%). DSM-5 research diagnoses included binge eating disorder (9%), bulimia nervosa (2%), subthreshold binge eating disorder (5%), subthreshold bulimia nervosa (2%), purging disorder (1%), night eating syndrome (6%), and other (7%). Interrater reliability between clinicians and research assessors was “substantial” for both DSM-IV ( = 0.64, 84% agreement) and DSM-5 ( = 0.63, 83% agreement). Conclusion. DSM-5 ED criteria can be reliably applied in an obesity treatment setting and appear to yield an overall ED point prevalence comparable to DSM-IV.</dcterms:abstract> <dc:contributor>Koh, Katherine A.</dc:contributor> <dc:creator>Murray, Helen B.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Becker, Anne E.</dc:creator> <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/55653/1/Thomas_2-18j6ynqjfgh8w0.pdf"/> <dc:contributor>Thomas, Jennifer J.</dc:contributor> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/55653"/> <dcterms:issued>2014</dcterms:issued> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dc:creator>Gorman, Mark J.</dc:creator> <dc:rights>Attribution 3.0 Unported</dc:rights> <dc:creator>Eddy, Kamryn T.</dc:creator> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-11-25T12:28:23Z</dc:date> <dc:creator>Hartmann, Andrea S.</dc:creator> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/"/> <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/55653/1/Thomas_2-18j6ynqjfgh8w0.pdf"/> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/> <dc:contributor>Eddy, Kamryn T.</dc:contributor> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>
Internal note
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Examination date of dissertation
Method of financing
Comment on publication
Alliance license
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
International Co-Authors
Bibliography of Konstanz
No
Refereed
Yes