Caregiver-Youth Agreement on the Nine-Item Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder Survey.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Julia Carmody, Carly E Milliren, Tracy K Richmond, McGreggor Crowley, Olivia Eldredge, Grace B Jhe, Melissa Freizinger, Elana M Bern
{"title":"Caregiver-Youth Agreement on the Nine-Item Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder Survey.","authors":"Julia Carmody, Carly E Milliren, Tracy K Richmond, McGreggor Crowley, Olivia Eldredge, Grace B Jhe, Melissa Freizinger, Elana M Bern","doi":"10.1002/eat.24384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient and caregiver perspectives are critical in the evaluation of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID); however, little is understood about how caregiver and youth perceptions may differ. This study compared caregiver and youth reports among pediatric patients from an outpatient ARFID program.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients (217 individuals with ARFID, aged 8-17) and their caregivers completed the Nine-Item ARFID Screen (NIAS), a screening tool with parallel youth and caregiver report forms. The NIAS measures ARFID symptomatology across three presentations: sensory-based selectivity (Picky Eating), low appetite/lack of interest in eating (Appetite), and fear of aversive consequences (Fear). Patient and caregiver NIAS scores were compared using t tests, and agreement was assessed via Pearson correlations. We examined the unadjusted bivariate association between patient age and caregiver-patient agreement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patient mean age was 12.9 (SD = 2.5) and the majority were male (57.1%) and White, non-Hispanic (68.2%) and with private insurance (88.0%). Caregivers reported higher ARFID symptomatology than patients themselves. Using caregiver scores compared to patients, a larger percentage was classified as all three presentations (23.5% vs. 11.5%) or combined selectivity and appetite (46.0% vs. 31.8%). Caregiver scores were higher on average regardless of patient age.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Results support obtaining both patient and caregiver reports whenever possible. Each perspective, as well as areas of discordance, may inform additional evaluation and treatment planning.</p>","PeriodicalId":51067,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Eating Disorders","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","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://doi.org/10.1002/eat.24384","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

Background: Patient and caregiver perspectives are critical in the evaluation of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID); however, little is understood about how caregiver and youth perceptions may differ. This study compared caregiver and youth reports among pediatric patients from an outpatient ARFID program.

Methods: Patients (217 individuals with ARFID, aged 8-17) and their caregivers completed the Nine-Item ARFID Screen (NIAS), a screening tool with parallel youth and caregiver report forms. The NIAS measures ARFID symptomatology across three presentations: sensory-based selectivity (Picky Eating), low appetite/lack of interest in eating (Appetite), and fear of aversive consequences (Fear). Patient and caregiver NIAS scores were compared using t tests, and agreement was assessed via Pearson correlations. We examined the unadjusted bivariate association between patient age and caregiver-patient agreement.

Results: Patient mean age was 12.9 (SD = 2.5) and the majority were male (57.1%) and White, non-Hispanic (68.2%) and with private insurance (88.0%). Caregivers reported higher ARFID symptomatology than patients themselves. Using caregiver scores compared to patients, a larger percentage was classified as all three presentations (23.5% vs. 11.5%) or combined selectivity and appetite (46.0% vs. 31.8%). Caregiver scores were higher on average regardless of patient age.

Discussion: Results support obtaining both patient and caregiver reports whenever possible. Each perspective, as well as areas of discordance, may inform additional evaluation and treatment planning.

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