Detecting clinical cases of binge eating in diabetes care: Introducing the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey-10 (DEPS-10) for type 1 and type 2 diabetes

IF 3.4 3区医学 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM

Diabetic Medicine Pub Date : 2025-05-29 DOI:10.1111/dme.70060

Laura Yvonne Klinker, Andreas Schmitt, Dominic Ehrmann, Bernhard Kulzer, Norbert Hermanns

{"title":"Detecting clinical cases of binge eating in diabetes care: Introducing the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey-10 (DEPS-10) for type 1 and type 2 diabetes","authors":"Laura Yvonne Klinker, Andreas Schmitt, Dominic Ehrmann, Bernhard Kulzer, Norbert Hermanns","doi":"10.1111/dme.70060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>Binge eating disorders (BED) are underdiagnosed in diabetes care, despite being the most common eating problem for diabetes patients. While diabetes-specific screening for disordered eating behaviour is recommended, the only diabetes-specific instrument available, Diabetes Eating Problem Survey-Revised (DEPS-R), focuses on type 1 diabetes and rapid-acting insulin, limiting its use across diabetes types and treatment regimens. This study aimed to develop a non-insulin version of the DEPS-R and evaluate its screening performance for BED in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The DEPS-R was reduced to 10 non-insulin-specific items (DEPS-10). As part of the ongoing pro-mental study, 679 people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes completed the baseline survey and took part in diagnostic interviews to assess BED. The screening performance of the DEPS-10 was tested via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and compared with DEPS-R and food-related items of the Problem Areas In Diabetes (PAID).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p><i>N</i> = 24 participants (total = 3.5%; type 1 = 2.9%, type 2 = 4.3%) were diagnosed with a current BED. The DEPS-10 performed well in screening for BED (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.92, <i>p</i> < 0.001) comparable with the DEPS-R (AUC = 0.92, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and exceeded the performance of food-related PAID items (AUC = 0.82, <i>p</i> < 0.001). A cut-off score of ≥15 showed optimal sensitivity and specificity in BED screening. People who met the cut-off had significantly higher BMI and HbA1c and more diabetes distress, depressive and anxiety symptoms.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>DEPS-10 is a reliable screening instrument for BED. Its associations with glycaemic and mental health outcomes reflect its good construct validity comparable to DEPS-R.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11251,"journal":{"name":"Diabetic Medicine","volume":"42 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dme.70060","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dme.70060","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims

Binge eating disorders (BED) are underdiagnosed in diabetes care, despite being the most common eating problem for diabetes patients. While diabetes-specific screening for disordered eating behaviour is recommended, the only diabetes-specific instrument available, Diabetes Eating Problem Survey-Revised (DEPS-R), focuses on type 1 diabetes and rapid-acting insulin, limiting its use across diabetes types and treatment regimens. This study aimed to develop a non-insulin version of the DEPS-R and evaluate its screening performance for BED in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Methods

The DEPS-R was reduced to 10 non-insulin-specific items (DEPS-10). As part of the ongoing pro-mental study, 679 people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes completed the baseline survey and took part in diagnostic interviews to assess BED. The screening performance of the DEPS-10 was tested via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and compared with DEPS-R and food-related items of the Problem Areas In Diabetes (PAID).

Results

N = 24 participants (total = 3.5%; type 1 = 2.9%, type 2 = 4.3%) were diagnosed with a current BED. The DEPS-10 performed well in screening for BED (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.92, p < 0.001) comparable with the DEPS-R (AUC = 0.92, p < 0.001) and exceeded the performance of food-related PAID items (AUC = 0.82, p < 0.001). A cut-off score of ≥15 showed optimal sensitivity and specificity in BED screening. People who met the cut-off had significantly higher BMI and HbA1c and more diabetes distress, depressive and anxiety symptoms.

Conclusions

DEPS-10 is a reliable screening instrument for BED. Its associations with glycaemic and mental health outcomes reflect its good construct validity comparable to DEPS-R.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

在糖尿病护理中发现暴食的临床病例：介绍针对1型和2型糖尿病的糖尿病饮食问题调查-10 （DEPS-10）

目的：尽管暴饮暴食是糖尿病患者最常见的饮食问题，但在糖尿病护理中仍未得到充分诊断。虽然建议对饮食失调行为进行糖尿病特异性筛查，但唯一可用的糖尿病特异性工具——糖尿病饮食问题调查修订版（dps - r）——侧重于1型糖尿病和速效胰岛素，限制了其在糖尿病类型和治疗方案中的使用。本研究旨在开发一种非胰岛素版本的dpps - r，并评估其在1型和2型糖尿病患者中筛查BED的性能。方法：将DEPS-R缩减为10项非胰岛素特异性项目（DEPS-10）。作为正在进行的促进心理研究的一部分，679名1型或2型糖尿病患者完成了基线调查，并参加了诊断性访谈，以评估BED。通过受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线分析检验dps -10的筛查性能，并与糖尿病问题区（PAID）的dps -r和食物相关项目进行比较。结果：N = 24名受试者(总数= 3.5%；1型= 2.9%，2型= 4.3%)被诊断为当前BED。dps -10对BED的筛查效果良好（曲线下面积[AUC] = 0.92, p）结论：dps -10是一种可靠的BED筛查仪器。它与血糖和心理健康结果的关联反映了其与DEPS-R相当的良好结构效度。

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

Diabetic Medicine 医学-内分泌学与代谢

CiteScore

7.20

自引率

5.70%

发文量

229

审稿时长

3-6 weeks

期刊介绍： Diabetic Medicine, the official journal of Diabetes UK, is published monthly simultaneously, in print and online editions. The journal publishes a range of key information on all clinical aspects of diabetes mellitus, ranging from human genetic studies through clinical physiology and trials to diabetes epidemiology. We do not publish original animal or cell culture studies unless they are part of a study of clinical diabetes involving humans. Categories of publication include research articles, reviews, editorials, commentaries, and correspondence. All material is peer-reviewed. We aim to disseminate knowledge about diabetes research with the goal of improving the management of people with diabetes. The journal therefore seeks to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas between clinicians and researchers worldwide. Topics covered are of importance to all healthcare professionals working with people with diabetes, whether in primary care or specialist services. Surplus generated from the sale of Diabetic Medicine is used by Diabetes UK to know diabetes better and fight diabetes more effectively on behalf of all people affected by and at risk of diabetes as well as their families and carers.”