{"title":"阿拉伯语版减肥手术后饮食失调问卷(EDABS - Q - Arabic18)的翻译和心理测量评估","authors":"Mohamed Hany, Kareem El-Ansari, Walid El Ansari","doi":"10.1007/s11695-025-07910-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is no validated Arabic questionnaire to assess eating disorders (ED) after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) without the need for an interview. We undertook this task.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The English-published Eating Disorder Examination-Self-report Questionnaire Bariatric Surgery Version (EDABS-Q) was translated and adapted following international guidelines (forward/backward translation, expert panel review, and pretesting). Randomly selected adult patients (n = 1145) who had MBS since ≥ 1 year completed the Arabic questionnaire (EDABS-Q-Arabic). Psychometric properties of EDABS-Q-Arabic were assessed, including face validity (expert panel), construct validity (exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, structural model), internal consistency (Cronbach's α), and discriminant validity [heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio criterion]. Multiple logistic regression analyses tested associations between patient/surgical characteristics and various factors of the Arabic questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Exploratory factor analysis generated a three-factor solution (18 items): 'concerns' about shape/weight/eating (9 items), 'restraint' behaviors (4 items), and 'purging' behaviors (5 items), explaining 22% of the total variance. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed this factor structure displayed good model-data fit, with comparative fit index (0.96) and Tucker-Lewis index (0.95) both > 0.95 threshold; χ<sup>2</sup>/df ratio = 1.52 (recommended value ≤ 2); root mean square error of approximation = 0.031 (90%CI:0.022-0.040, p = 1.000) and standardized root mean square residual = 0.047 (recommended values ≤ 0.05). Cronbach's alpha (internal consistency) was 0.80 for 'concerns' (95%CI:0.78-0.82), 0.62 for 'restraint' (95%CI:0.55-0.68), and 0.61 for 'purging' behavior (95%CI:0.51-0.69). EDABS-Q-Arabic18's discriminant validity was excellent, confirming the distinctiveness of each factor, with 0.208 HTMT ratio between 'concerns' and 'restraint' factors, 0.198 between 'concerns' and 'purging', and 0.257 between 'restraint' and 'purging' factors (recommended thresholds < 0.85-0.90). The prevalence of 'concerns' was 98.4%, with patients experiencing mild (31.1%), moderate (48.9%), severe (18.4%), or no (1.6%) concerns. The prevalence of 'restraint' behaviors was high (79.7%) but mostly mild (53.1%) or moderate (22.5%). 'Purging' behaviors had a lower prevalence (44.2%), with 40.1% mild, 3.8% moderate, and 0.3% severe purging. Logistic regression showed that for severe 'concerns', increasing age and pre-operative BMI displayed lower odds OR = 0.98, 95%CI 0.96-1.00, p = 0.013; OR = 0.96, 95%CI 0.93-0.98, p = 0.001 respectively), while current BMI and time since surgery exhibited significant positive associations (OR = 1.19, 95%CI 1.14-1.24, p < 0.001; OR = 1.10, 95%CI 1.02-1.18, p = 0.011, respectively). For severe 'restraint' behaviors, only pre-operative BMI displayed significant association (OR = 1.05-95%CI 1.00-1.09, p = 0.023). Moderate to severe 'purging' behaviors had no significant associations with any patient/surgical characteristics. The type of MBS procedure was not associated with any of the three factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 18-item Arabic version of the Eating Disorder Examination-Self-report Questionnaire Bariatric Surgery Version (EDABS-Q-Arabic18) is a culturally appropriate, valid, and reliable tool for assessing post-MBS ED. Further validation across Arabic-speaking populations is encouraged to strengthen its broader applicability.</p>","PeriodicalId":19460,"journal":{"name":"Obesity Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Translation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Arabic Version of the Eating Disorders After Bariatric Surgery Questionnaire (EDABS‑Q‑Arabic18).\",\"authors\":\"Mohamed Hany, Kareem El-Ansari, Walid El Ansari\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11695-025-07910-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is no validated Arabic questionnaire to assess eating disorders (ED) after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) without the need for an interview. We undertook this task.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The English-published Eating Disorder Examination-Self-report Questionnaire Bariatric Surgery Version (EDABS-Q) was translated and adapted following international guidelines (forward/backward translation, expert panel review, and pretesting). Randomly selected adult patients (n = 1145) who had MBS since ≥ 1 year completed the Arabic questionnaire (EDABS-Q-Arabic). Psychometric properties of EDABS-Q-Arabic were assessed, including face validity (expert panel), construct validity (exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, structural model), internal consistency (Cronbach's α), and discriminant validity [heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio criterion]. Multiple logistic regression analyses tested associations between patient/surgical characteristics and various factors of the Arabic questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Exploratory factor analysis generated a three-factor solution (18 items): 'concerns' about shape/weight/eating (9 items), 'restraint' behaviors (4 items), and 'purging' behaviors (5 items), explaining 22% of the total variance. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed this factor structure displayed good model-data fit, with comparative fit index (0.96) and Tucker-Lewis index (0.95) both > 0.95 threshold; χ<sup>2</sup>/df ratio = 1.52 (recommended value ≤ 2); root mean square error of approximation = 0.031 (90%CI:0.022-0.040, p = 1.000) and standardized root mean square residual = 0.047 (recommended values ≤ 0.05). Cronbach's alpha (internal consistency) was 0.80 for 'concerns' (95%CI:0.78-0.82), 0.62 for 'restraint' (95%CI:0.55-0.68), and 0.61 for 'purging' behavior (95%CI:0.51-0.69). EDABS-Q-Arabic18's discriminant validity was excellent, confirming the distinctiveness of each factor, with 0.208 HTMT ratio between 'concerns' and 'restraint' factors, 0.198 between 'concerns' and 'purging', and 0.257 between 'restraint' and 'purging' factors (recommended thresholds < 0.85-0.90). The prevalence of 'concerns' was 98.4%, with patients experiencing mild (31.1%), moderate (48.9%), severe (18.4%), or no (1.6%) concerns. The prevalence of 'restraint' behaviors was high (79.7%) but mostly mild (53.1%) or moderate (22.5%). 'Purging' behaviors had a lower prevalence (44.2%), with 40.1% mild, 3.8% moderate, and 0.3% severe purging. Logistic regression showed that for severe 'concerns', increasing age and pre-operative BMI displayed lower odds OR = 0.98, 95%CI 0.96-1.00, p = 0.013; OR = 0.96, 95%CI 0.93-0.98, p = 0.001 respectively), while current BMI and time since surgery exhibited significant positive associations (OR = 1.19, 95%CI 1.14-1.24, p < 0.001; OR = 1.10, 95%CI 1.02-1.18, p = 0.011, respectively). For severe 'restraint' behaviors, only pre-operative BMI displayed significant association (OR = 1.05-95%CI 1.00-1.09, p = 0.023). Moderate to severe 'purging' behaviors had no significant associations with any patient/surgical characteristics. The type of MBS procedure was not associated with any of the three factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 18-item Arabic version of the Eating Disorder Examination-Self-report Questionnaire Bariatric Surgery Version (EDABS-Q-Arabic18) is a culturally appropriate, valid, and reliable tool for assessing post-MBS ED. Further validation across Arabic-speaking populations is encouraged to strengthen its broader applicability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19460,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Obesity Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Obesity Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-025-07910-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obesity Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-025-07910-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Translation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Arabic Version of the Eating Disorders After Bariatric Surgery Questionnaire (EDABS‑Q‑Arabic18).
Background: There is no validated Arabic questionnaire to assess eating disorders (ED) after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) without the need for an interview. We undertook this task.
Methods: The English-published Eating Disorder Examination-Self-report Questionnaire Bariatric Surgery Version (EDABS-Q) was translated and adapted following international guidelines (forward/backward translation, expert panel review, and pretesting). Randomly selected adult patients (n = 1145) who had MBS since ≥ 1 year completed the Arabic questionnaire (EDABS-Q-Arabic). Psychometric properties of EDABS-Q-Arabic were assessed, including face validity (expert panel), construct validity (exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, structural model), internal consistency (Cronbach's α), and discriminant validity [heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio criterion]. Multiple logistic regression analyses tested associations between patient/surgical characteristics and various factors of the Arabic questionnaire.
Results: Exploratory factor analysis generated a three-factor solution (18 items): 'concerns' about shape/weight/eating (9 items), 'restraint' behaviors (4 items), and 'purging' behaviors (5 items), explaining 22% of the total variance. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed this factor structure displayed good model-data fit, with comparative fit index (0.96) and Tucker-Lewis index (0.95) both > 0.95 threshold; χ2/df ratio = 1.52 (recommended value ≤ 2); root mean square error of approximation = 0.031 (90%CI:0.022-0.040, p = 1.000) and standardized root mean square residual = 0.047 (recommended values ≤ 0.05). Cronbach's alpha (internal consistency) was 0.80 for 'concerns' (95%CI:0.78-0.82), 0.62 for 'restraint' (95%CI:0.55-0.68), and 0.61 for 'purging' behavior (95%CI:0.51-0.69). EDABS-Q-Arabic18's discriminant validity was excellent, confirming the distinctiveness of each factor, with 0.208 HTMT ratio between 'concerns' and 'restraint' factors, 0.198 between 'concerns' and 'purging', and 0.257 between 'restraint' and 'purging' factors (recommended thresholds < 0.85-0.90). The prevalence of 'concerns' was 98.4%, with patients experiencing mild (31.1%), moderate (48.9%), severe (18.4%), or no (1.6%) concerns. The prevalence of 'restraint' behaviors was high (79.7%) but mostly mild (53.1%) or moderate (22.5%). 'Purging' behaviors had a lower prevalence (44.2%), with 40.1% mild, 3.8% moderate, and 0.3% severe purging. Logistic regression showed that for severe 'concerns', increasing age and pre-operative BMI displayed lower odds OR = 0.98, 95%CI 0.96-1.00, p = 0.013; OR = 0.96, 95%CI 0.93-0.98, p = 0.001 respectively), while current BMI and time since surgery exhibited significant positive associations (OR = 1.19, 95%CI 1.14-1.24, p < 0.001; OR = 1.10, 95%CI 1.02-1.18, p = 0.011, respectively). For severe 'restraint' behaviors, only pre-operative BMI displayed significant association (OR = 1.05-95%CI 1.00-1.09, p = 0.023). Moderate to severe 'purging' behaviors had no significant associations with any patient/surgical characteristics. The type of MBS procedure was not associated with any of the three factors.
Conclusions: The 18-item Arabic version of the Eating Disorder Examination-Self-report Questionnaire Bariatric Surgery Version (EDABS-Q-Arabic18) is a culturally appropriate, valid, and reliable tool for assessing post-MBS ED. Further validation across Arabic-speaking populations is encouraged to strengthen its broader applicability.
期刊介绍:
Obesity Surgery is the official journal of the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and metabolic disorders (IFSO). A journal for bariatric/metabolic surgeons, Obesity Surgery provides an international, interdisciplinary forum for communicating the latest research, surgical and laparoscopic techniques, for treatment of massive obesity and metabolic disorders. Topics covered include original research, clinical reports, current status, guidelines, historical notes, invited commentaries, letters to the editor, medicolegal issues, meeting abstracts, modern surgery/technical innovations, new concepts, reviews, scholarly presentations and opinions.
Obesity Surgery benefits surgeons performing obesity/metabolic surgery, general surgeons and surgical residents, endoscopists, anesthetists, support staff, nurses, dietitians, psychiatrists, psychologists, plastic surgeons, internists including endocrinologists and diabetologists, nutritional scientists, and those dealing with eating disorders.