Using clinical cutoff scores on the eating disorder examination-questionnaire to evaluate eating disorder symptoms during and after naturalistic intensive treatment.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Eating Disorders Pub Date : 2023-09-03 DOI:10.1080/10640266.2023.2191488
Elizabeth A Velkoff, Tiffany A Brown, Walter H Kaye, Christina E Wierenga
{"title":"Using clinical cutoff scores on the eating disorder examination-questionnaire to evaluate eating disorder symptoms during and after naturalistic intensive treatment.","authors":"Elizabeth A Velkoff,&nbsp;Tiffany A Brown,&nbsp;Walter H Kaye,&nbsp;Christina E Wierenga","doi":"10.1080/10640266.2023.2191488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Clinical cutoff scores for self-report measures provide a means of evaluating clinically significant pathology during and after treatment. A cutoff of 2.8 on the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) has been recommended to screen for eating disorders (ED). We used this cutoff to assess ED symptoms in adolescents (<i>n</i> = 444) and adults (<i>n</i> = 592) through ED treatment and follow-up. Most patients scored above 2.8 at intake (adolescents 67%, <i>M</i> = 3.21; adults 78%, <i>M</i> = 4.20) and below 2.8 at discharge (adolescents 65%, <i>M</i> = 1.87; adults 66%, <i>M</i> = 2.67), with gains often maintained through follow-up (40% of adolescents and 35% of adults at 12-month follow-up). EDE-Q scores were higher in adults than adolescents and in patients with binge/purge disorders. Results suggest a cutoff of 2.8 on the EDE-Q effectively tracks ED symptom improvement through treatment and discharge. This supports the need for the development of culture-specific and empirically developed clinical cutoffs and their widespread use to evaluate program effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":48835,"journal":{"name":"Eating Disorders","volume":"31 5","pages":"464-478"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eating Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10640266.2023.2191488","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Clinical cutoff scores for self-report measures provide a means of evaluating clinically significant pathology during and after treatment. A cutoff of 2.8 on the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) has been recommended to screen for eating disorders (ED). We used this cutoff to assess ED symptoms in adolescents (n = 444) and adults (n = 592) through ED treatment and follow-up. Most patients scored above 2.8 at intake (adolescents 67%, M = 3.21; adults 78%, M = 4.20) and below 2.8 at discharge (adolescents 65%, M = 1.87; adults 66%, M = 2.67), with gains often maintained through follow-up (40% of adolescents and 35% of adults at 12-month follow-up). EDE-Q scores were higher in adults than adolescents and in patients with binge/purge disorders. Results suggest a cutoff of 2.8 on the EDE-Q effectively tracks ED symptom improvement through treatment and discharge. This supports the need for the development of culture-specific and empirically developed clinical cutoffs and their widespread use to evaluate program effectiveness.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
采用进食障碍检查问卷的临床分值评估进食障碍在自然强化治疗期间和之后的症状。
自我报告措施的临床截止分数提供了在治疗期间和治疗后评估临床显著病理的手段。饮食失调检查问卷(ED - q)的分界点为2.8分,建议筛查饮食失调(ED)。我们通过ED治疗和随访来评估青少年(n = 444)和成人(n = 592)的ED症状。大多数患者在摄入时得分在2.8以上(青少年67%,M = 3.21;成人78%,M = 4.20),出院时低于2.8(青少年65%,M = 1.87;成人66%,M = 2.67),在12个月的随访中(40%的青少年和35%的成年人),这种增长通常保持不变。成人的ed - q评分高于青少年和暴食/清除障碍患者。结果表明,ED - q的2.8分界点通过治疗和出院有效地跟踪ED症状的改善。这支持了发展文化特异性和经验开发的临床截止点的需要,并广泛使用它们来评估项目的有效性。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Eating Disorders
Eating Disorders PSYCHIATRY-PSYCHOLOGY
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
25
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.
期刊最新文献
Peer mentors' experiences of delivering peer support for individuals with eating disorders: giving back and supporting processes of change. Absolute and relative outcomes of cognitive behavior therapy for eating disorders in adults: a meta-analysis. Differential effects of community involvement on eating disorder prevention outcomes in sexual minority men. Developing a justice-focused body image program for U.S. middle schoolers: a school-based community-engaged research process. The need for more inclusive measurement to advance equity in eating disorders prevention.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1