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。

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Esther Henriet, Joanna Norton, Maude Seneque, Laurent Maimoun, Philippe Courtet, Sébastien Guillaume
{"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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究比较了体重和体形高估(OWS)、瘦度驱动(DT)及其组合(OWS-DT)作为神经性厌食症(AN)严重程度分类的替代方法与第五版《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》(DSM-5)严重程度分类。方法:312例求诊AN门诊患者(平均年龄26.8岁,SD = 10.2,平均体重指数17.3,SD = 2.4)采用基于bmi的DSM-5标准(轻度/中度/重度/极端)、OWS(否/是)、DT(否/是)和OWS-DT联合(无/一种或另一种/两种)进行分类。这些分类是根据临床和功能严重程度指标的相关性进行评估的,这些指标包括精神合并症、通过进食障碍检查问卷和进食障碍量表进行的精神病理、通过进食障碍生活质量问卷和工作与社会适应量表进行的功能损害,以及生物标志物。结果:OWS和DT分别与精神合并症、精神病理和功能障碍呈显著正相关。OWS-DT组的严重程度增加,区分轻度(无),中度(主要是OWS)和重度(OWS和DT)。DT很少没有OWS出现。单独的DSM-5分类具有有限的临床相关性,主要反映了能量摄入的限制。在生物标记的严重程度分类中没有出现显著差异。讨论:研究结果仅对DSM-5严重性标准提供有限的支持。OWS和DT显示出更清晰的临床效用,OWS-DT联合使用更有效地识别严重程度。逐步模型筛选OWS,然后进行DT评估,可以最好地捕捉临床环境中的严重程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信