{"title":"在一项横断面研究中使用DSM-5替代标准评估神经性厌食症的严重程度。","authors":"Esther Henriet, Joanna Norton, Maude Seneque, Laurent Maimoun, Philippe Courtet, Sébastien Guillaume","doi":"10.1002/eat.24542","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study compared overvaluation of weight and shape (OWS), drive for thinness (DT), and their combination (OWS-DT) as alternative severity classifications for anorexia nervosa (AN) to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) severity classification.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>312 AN treatment-seeking outpatients (mean age = 26.8, SD = 10.2, mean body mass index = 17.3, SD = 2.4) were classified using BMI-based DSM-5 criteria (mild/moderate/severe/extreme), OWS (no/yes), DT (no/yes), and OWS-DT combination (neither/one or the other/both). These classifications were evaluated based on associations with clinical and functional severity indicators, including psychiatric comorbidities, psychopathology via the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire and the Eating Disorder Inventory, functional impairment via the Eating Disorders Quality-of-Life Questionnaire and Work-and-Social Adjustment Scale, and biological markers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>OWS and DT separately were strongly and positively associated with psychiatric comorbidities, psychopathology, and functional impairment. Severity increased across OWS-DT groups, distinguishing mild (neither), moderate (mainly OWS), and severe (both OWS and DT). DT rarely appeared without OWS. DSM-5 classification alone had limited clinical relevance, primarily reflecting restriction of energy intake. No significant differences emerged across severity classifications for biological markers.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Findings offer limited support for DSM-5 severity criteria alone. OWS and DT showed clearer clinical utility, with the OWS-DT combination more effectively identifying severity. A stepwise model-screening for OWS followed by DT assessment-may best capture severity in clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":51067,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Eating Disorders","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Severity in Anorexia Nervosa Using Alternative Criteria to the DSM-5 in a Cross-Sectional Study.\",\"authors\":\"Esther Henriet, Joanna Norton, Maude Seneque, Laurent Maimoun, Philippe Courtet, Sébastien Guillaume\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/eat.24542\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study compared overvaluation of weight and shape (OWS), drive for thinness (DT), and their combination (OWS-DT) as alternative severity classifications for anorexia nervosa (AN) to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) severity classification.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>312 AN treatment-seeking outpatients (mean age = 26.8, SD = 10.2, mean body mass index = 17.3, SD = 2.4) were classified using BMI-based DSM-5 criteria (mild/moderate/severe/extreme), OWS (no/yes), DT (no/yes), and OWS-DT combination (neither/one or the other/both). These classifications were evaluated based on associations with clinical and functional severity indicators, including psychiatric comorbidities, psychopathology via the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire and the Eating Disorder Inventory, functional impairment via the Eating Disorders Quality-of-Life Questionnaire and Work-and-Social Adjustment Scale, and biological markers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>OWS and DT separately were strongly and positively associated with psychiatric comorbidities, psychopathology, and functional impairment. Severity increased across OWS-DT groups, distinguishing mild (neither), moderate (mainly OWS), and severe (both OWS and DT). DT rarely appeared without OWS. DSM-5 classification alone had limited clinical relevance, primarily reflecting restriction of energy intake. No significant differences emerged across severity classifications for biological markers.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Findings offer limited support for DSM-5 severity criteria alone. OWS and DT showed clearer clinical utility, with the OWS-DT combination more effectively identifying severity. A stepwise model-screening for OWS followed by DT assessment-may best capture severity in clinical settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51067,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Eating Disorders\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-10\",\"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.24542\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Eating Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.24542","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessing Severity in Anorexia Nervosa Using Alternative Criteria to the DSM-5 in a Cross-Sectional Study.
Objective: This study compared overvaluation of weight and shape (OWS), drive for thinness (DT), and their combination (OWS-DT) as alternative severity classifications for anorexia nervosa (AN) to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) severity classification.
Method: 312 AN treatment-seeking outpatients (mean age = 26.8, SD = 10.2, mean body mass index = 17.3, SD = 2.4) were classified using BMI-based DSM-5 criteria (mild/moderate/severe/extreme), OWS (no/yes), DT (no/yes), and OWS-DT combination (neither/one or the other/both). These classifications were evaluated based on associations with clinical and functional severity indicators, including psychiatric comorbidities, psychopathology via the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire and the Eating Disorder Inventory, functional impairment via the Eating Disorders Quality-of-Life Questionnaire and Work-and-Social Adjustment Scale, and biological markers.
Results: OWS and DT separately were strongly and positively associated with psychiatric comorbidities, psychopathology, and functional impairment. Severity increased across OWS-DT groups, distinguishing mild (neither), moderate (mainly OWS), and severe (both OWS and DT). DT rarely appeared without OWS. DSM-5 classification alone had limited clinical relevance, primarily reflecting restriction of energy intake. No significant differences emerged across severity classifications for biological markers.
Discussion: Findings offer limited support for DSM-5 severity criteria alone. OWS and DT showed clearer clinical utility, with the OWS-DT combination more effectively identifying severity. A stepwise model-screening for OWS followed by DT assessment-may best capture severity in clinical settings.
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.