Taking a Global View of the OSFED Category From Inside and Outside the DSM-5: Comment on Dang et al. 2024

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Angélica M. Claudino, Phillipa J. Hay
{"title":"Taking a Global View of the OSFED Category From Inside and Outside the DSM-5: Comment on Dang et al. 2024","authors":"Angélica M. Claudino,&nbsp;Phillipa J. Hay","doi":"10.1002/eat.24267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>This Commentary discusses the findings of Dang et al.'s systematic review and metanalysis on the “Other Specified Feeding or Eating Disorder” (OSFED) category in the context of current conceptualizations and main international diagnostic schemes of classification, the DSM-5 and the ICD-11. The aim to reduce less specified eating disorder categories in these classifications has not been completely achieved and OSFED cases remain prevalent. Different definitions of OSFED contribute to difficulties in study selection and limitation of data aggregation in metanalysis, highlighting the need for improving methodologies for studying OSFED subtypes. Although use of either the DSM-5 or ICD-11 scheme concurs with Dang et al.'s main finding that OSFED comprises categories of similar clinical significance to the recognized eating disorders, the ICD-11 includes more people with anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, or binge-eating disorder who would receive a DSM-5 OSFED diagnosis. This may have impacts for epidemiological studies of distribution as well as for identification and treatment of the individual. We support that before creating new eating disorder categories, consideration be given to also broadening current DSM-5 criteria. This approach may result in fewer OSFED subtypes needing elevation to distinct categories, potentially limiting these to just purging disorder and night eating syndrome.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51067,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Eating Disorders","volume":"57 10","pages":"2045-2048"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Eating Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eat.24267","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This Commentary discusses the findings of Dang et al.'s systematic review and metanalysis on the “Other Specified Feeding or Eating Disorder” (OSFED) category in the context of current conceptualizations and main international diagnostic schemes of classification, the DSM-5 and the ICD-11. The aim to reduce less specified eating disorder categories in these classifications has not been completely achieved and OSFED cases remain prevalent. Different definitions of OSFED contribute to difficulties in study selection and limitation of data aggregation in metanalysis, highlighting the need for improving methodologies for studying OSFED subtypes. Although use of either the DSM-5 or ICD-11 scheme concurs with Dang et al.'s main finding that OSFED comprises categories of similar clinical significance to the recognized eating disorders, the ICD-11 includes more people with anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, or binge-eating disorder who would receive a DSM-5 OSFED diagnosis. This may have impacts for epidemiological studies of distribution as well as for identification and treatment of the individual. We support that before creating new eating disorder categories, consideration be given to also broadening current DSM-5 criteria. This approach may result in fewer OSFED subtypes needing elevation to distinct categories, potentially limiting these to just purging disorder and night eating syndrome.

从 DSM-5 的内部和外部全面看待 OSFED 类别:对 Dang 等人的评论 2024。
本评论结合当前的概念和主要的国际诊断分类方案(DSM-5 和 ICD-11),讨论了 Dang 等人关于 "其他特定进食或进食障碍"(OSFED)类别的系统回顾和荟萃分析结果。在这些分类中减少非特定进食障碍类别的目标尚未完全实现,非特定进食障碍病例仍然普遍存在。对 OSFED 的不同定义造成了研究选择上的困难和荟萃分析中数据汇总的限制,突出了改进 OSFED 亚型研究方法的必要性。尽管使用DSM-5或ICD-11方案与Dang等人的主要发现一致,即OSFED包括与公认的进食障碍具有类似临床意义的类别,但ICD-11包括了更多的神经性厌食症、神经性贪食症或暴食症患者,而这些患者将被诊断为DSM-5 OSFED。这可能会对流行病学的分布研究以及对个人的识别和治疗产生影响。我们支持在创建新的进食障碍类别之前,同时考虑扩大当前的 DSM-5 标准。这种方法可能会减少 OSFED 亚型需要提升为不同类别的情况,有可能将这些亚型限制为清除障碍和夜食综合征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
12.70%
发文量
204
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Articles featured in the journal describe state-of-the-art scientific research on theory, methodology, etiology, clinical practice, and policy related to eating disorders, as well as contributions that facilitate scholarly critique and discussion of science and practice in the field. Theoretical and empirical work on obesity or healthy eating falls within the journal’s scope inasmuch as it facilitates the advancement of efforts to describe and understand, prevent, or treat eating disorders. IJED welcomes submissions from all regions of the world and representing all levels of inquiry (including basic science, clinical trials, implementation research, and dissemination studies), and across a full range of scientific methods, disciplines, and approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信