{"title":"需要更具包容性的测量方法,以促进饮食失调症预防的公平性。","authors":"Tricia Alexander, C Blair Burnette, Hannah Cory, Safiya McHale, Melissa Simone","doi":"10.1080/10640266.2024.2328460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Eating disorder (ED) research and practice have been shaped by prevailing stereotypes about who EDs are most likely to affect. Subsequently, the field has prioritized the needs and concerns of affluent, cisgender, heterosexual, white girls and women to the exclusion of others, especially people marginalized based on their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and/or gender identity. However, EDs exist across diverse groups and actually occur with elevated prevalence in several marginalized groups. Growing research points to differences in the drivers of EDs in such groups (e.g. desire to attain the curvy rather than thin ideal; dietary restraint due to food insecurity rather than weight/shape concerns), yet tools typically used for screening and intervention evaluation do not capture eating pathology driven by such factors. In this commentary, we describe gaps in existing ED assessment tools and argue these gaps likely underestimate EDs among marginalized groups, bias who is invited, participates in, and benefits from ED prevention programs, and obscure potential group differences in the efficacy of such programs. We also discuss the potential of these ramifications to exacerbate inequities in EDs. Finally, we outline recommendations to overcome existing gaps in measurement and, consequently, advance equity in the realm of ED prevention.</p>","PeriodicalId":48835,"journal":{"name":"Eating Disorders","volume":" ","pages":"798-816"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11401964/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The need for more inclusive measurement to advance equity in eating disorders prevention.\",\"authors\":\"Tricia Alexander, C Blair Burnette, Hannah Cory, Safiya McHale, Melissa Simone\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10640266.2024.2328460\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Eating disorder (ED) research and practice have been shaped by prevailing stereotypes about who EDs are most likely to affect. Subsequently, the field has prioritized the needs and concerns of affluent, cisgender, heterosexual, white girls and women to the exclusion of others, especially people marginalized based on their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and/or gender identity. However, EDs exist across diverse groups and actually occur with elevated prevalence in several marginalized groups. Growing research points to differences in the drivers of EDs in such groups (e.g. desire to attain the curvy rather than thin ideal; dietary restraint due to food insecurity rather than weight/shape concerns), yet tools typically used for screening and intervention evaluation do not capture eating pathology driven by such factors. In this commentary, we describe gaps in existing ED assessment tools and argue these gaps likely underestimate EDs among marginalized groups, bias who is invited, participates in, and benefits from ED prevention programs, and obscure potential group differences in the efficacy of such programs. We also discuss the potential of these ramifications to exacerbate inequities in EDs. Finally, we outline recommendations to overcome existing gaps in measurement and, consequently, advance equity in the realm of ED prevention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48835,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Eating Disorders\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"798-816\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11401964/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Eating Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10640266.2024.2328460\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eating Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10640266.2024.2328460","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
饮食失调症(ED)的研究和实践一直受到关于饮食失调症最有可能影响的人群的普遍刻板印象的影响。因此,该领域优先考虑了富裕、顺性别、异性恋、白人女孩和妇女的需求和关切,而将其他人排除在外,尤其是因种族、民族、性取向和/或性别认同而被边缘化的人群。然而,ED 在不同的群体中都存在,而且在一些边缘化群体中的发生率更高。越来越多的研究指出,在这些群体中,ED 的驱动因素存在差异(例如,渴望达到曲线美而非苗条的理想身材;因食物不安全而非体重/体型问题而限制饮食),但通常用于筛查和干预评估的工具并不能捕捉到由这些因素驱动的饮食病理学。在这篇评论中,我们描述了现有 ED 评估工具的缺陷,并认为这些缺陷可能低估了边缘化群体中的 ED,使受邀、参与 ED 预防计划并从中受益的人产生偏差,并掩盖了此类计划功效中潜在的群体差异。我们还讨论了这些影响加剧 ED 不平等的可能性。最后,我们概述了克服现有测量差距的建议,从而促进 ED 预防领域的公平。
The need for more inclusive measurement to advance equity in eating disorders prevention.
Eating disorder (ED) research and practice have been shaped by prevailing stereotypes about who EDs are most likely to affect. Subsequently, the field has prioritized the needs and concerns of affluent, cisgender, heterosexual, white girls and women to the exclusion of others, especially people marginalized based on their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and/or gender identity. However, EDs exist across diverse groups and actually occur with elevated prevalence in several marginalized groups. Growing research points to differences in the drivers of EDs in such groups (e.g. desire to attain the curvy rather than thin ideal; dietary restraint due to food insecurity rather than weight/shape concerns), yet tools typically used for screening and intervention evaluation do not capture eating pathology driven by such factors. In this commentary, we describe gaps in existing ED assessment tools and argue these gaps likely underestimate EDs among marginalized groups, bias who is invited, participates in, and benefits from ED prevention programs, and obscure potential group differences in the efficacy of such programs. We also discuss the potential of these ramifications to exacerbate inequities in EDs. Finally, we outline recommendations to overcome existing gaps in measurement and, consequently, advance equity in the realm of ED prevention.
期刊介绍:
Eating Disorders is contemporary and wide ranging, and takes a fundamentally practical, humanistic, compassionate view of clients and their presenting problems. You’ll find a multidisciplinary perspective on clinical issues and prevention research that considers the essential cultural, social, familial, and personal elements that not only foster eating-related problems, but also furnish clues that facilitate the most effective possible therapies and treatment approaches.