Marley G Billman Miller, Sophie R Abber, Antonia Hamilton, Shelby N Ortiz, Ross C Jacobucci, Jamal H Essayli, April R Smith, Lauren N Forrest
{"title":"数据挖掘识别神经性厌食症有意义的严重程度指标。","authors":"Marley G Billman Miller, Sophie R Abber, Antonia Hamilton, Shelby N Ortiz, Ross C Jacobucci, Jamal H Essayli, April R Smith, Lauren N Forrest","doi":"10.1037/abn0000962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The fifth edition of <i>the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders</i> defines anorexia nervosa (AN) severity based on body mass index (BMI). However, BMI categories do not reliably differentiate the intensity of AN and comorbid symptoms. Shape/weight overvaluation has been proposed as an alternative severity specifier. The present study used structural equation model (SEM) Trees to empirically determine specific levels of BMI and/or shape/weight overvaluation that differentiate AN severity. We also compared whether the SEM Tree-derived severity groups outperformed existing AN severity definitions. Participants were 1,666 adolescents and adults with AN who were receiving eating disorder treatment at one of the three levels of care (outpatient, partial hospital program, or residential). Participants completed self-reported questionnaires assessing eating pathology and comorbid symptoms. SEM Tree analyses first specified an outcome model of AN severity, and then recursively partitioned the outcome model into subgroups based on all values of BMI and shape/weight overvaluation. One-way analyses of variance and t tests determined which severity definition explained the most variance in clinical characteristics. SEM Tree analyses yielded five severity groups, all of which were defined based on increasing intensities of shape/weight overvaluation: < 2.25, 2.25-3.24, 3.25-4.24, 4.25-5.24, and ≥ 5.25. No groups were defined based on BMI. SEM Tree-derived groupings explained more variance in clinical characteristics than existing severity definitions. Taken together, shape/weight overvaluation appears to be a more accurate marker of AN severity than BMI. The empirically determined AN severity scheme accounted for the most variance in clinical characteristics. Future research should assess the predictive value of these empirically defined AN severity indicators. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":73914,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Data mining identifies meaningful severity specifiers for anorexia nervosa.\",\"authors\":\"Marley G Billman Miller, Sophie R Abber, Antonia Hamilton, Shelby N Ortiz, Ross C Jacobucci, Jamal H Essayli, April R Smith, Lauren N Forrest\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/abn0000962\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The fifth edition of <i>the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders</i> defines anorexia nervosa (AN) severity based on body mass index (BMI). However, BMI categories do not reliably differentiate the intensity of AN and comorbid symptoms. Shape/weight overvaluation has been proposed as an alternative severity specifier. The present study used structural equation model (SEM) Trees to empirically determine specific levels of BMI and/or shape/weight overvaluation that differentiate AN severity. We also compared whether the SEM Tree-derived severity groups outperformed existing AN severity definitions. Participants were 1,666 adolescents and adults with AN who were receiving eating disorder treatment at one of the three levels of care (outpatient, partial hospital program, or residential). Participants completed self-reported questionnaires assessing eating pathology and comorbid symptoms. SEM Tree analyses first specified an outcome model of AN severity, and then recursively partitioned the outcome model into subgroups based on all values of BMI and shape/weight overvaluation. One-way analyses of variance and t tests determined which severity definition explained the most variance in clinical characteristics. SEM Tree analyses yielded five severity groups, all of which were defined based on increasing intensities of shape/weight overvaluation: < 2.25, 2.25-3.24, 3.25-4.24, 4.25-5.24, and ≥ 5.25. No groups were defined based on BMI. SEM Tree-derived groupings explained more variance in clinical characteristics than existing severity definitions. Taken together, shape/weight overvaluation appears to be a more accurate marker of AN severity than BMI. The empirically determined AN severity scheme accounted for the most variance in clinical characteristics. Future research should assess the predictive value of these empirically defined AN severity indicators. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000962\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000962","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版根据身体质量指数(BMI)对神经性厌食症(AN)的严重程度进行了定义。然而,BMI分类不能可靠地区分AN的强度和合并症症状。形状/重量高估已被提议作为另一种严重性说明符。本研究使用结构方程模型(SEM)树来经验确定区分AN严重程度的BMI和/或形状/体重高估的具体水平。我们还比较了SEM树派生的严重性组是否优于现有的AN严重性定义。参与者是1,666名患有AN的青少年和成年人,他们在三个级别的护理(门诊,部分医院计划或住院)之一接受饮食失调治疗。参与者完成了评估饮食病理和共病症状的自我报告问卷。SEM树分析首先指定an严重程度的结果模型,然后根据BMI和形状/体重高估的所有值将结果模型递归划分为子组。单因素方差分析和t检验确定了哪个严重程度定义解释了临床特征的最大方差。SEM树分析产生了五个严重程度组,所有这些组都是基于形状/重量高估的增加强度来定义的:< 2.25,2.25-3.24,3.25-4.24,4.25-5.24和≥5.25。没有根据BMI来定义分组。SEM树衍生的分组比现有的严重程度定义解释了临床特征的更多差异。综上所述,身材/体重高估似乎是AN严重程度比BMI更准确的标志。经验确定的AN严重程度方案占临床特征的最大差异。未来的研究应评估这些经验定义的AN严重程度指标的预测价值。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,版权所有)。
Data mining identifies meaningful severity specifiers for anorexia nervosa.
The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders defines anorexia nervosa (AN) severity based on body mass index (BMI). However, BMI categories do not reliably differentiate the intensity of AN and comorbid symptoms. Shape/weight overvaluation has been proposed as an alternative severity specifier. The present study used structural equation model (SEM) Trees to empirically determine specific levels of BMI and/or shape/weight overvaluation that differentiate AN severity. We also compared whether the SEM Tree-derived severity groups outperformed existing AN severity definitions. Participants were 1,666 adolescents and adults with AN who were receiving eating disorder treatment at one of the three levels of care (outpatient, partial hospital program, or residential). Participants completed self-reported questionnaires assessing eating pathology and comorbid symptoms. SEM Tree analyses first specified an outcome model of AN severity, and then recursively partitioned the outcome model into subgroups based on all values of BMI and shape/weight overvaluation. One-way analyses of variance and t tests determined which severity definition explained the most variance in clinical characteristics. SEM Tree analyses yielded five severity groups, all of which were defined based on increasing intensities of shape/weight overvaluation: < 2.25, 2.25-3.24, 3.25-4.24, 4.25-5.24, and ≥ 5.25. No groups were defined based on BMI. SEM Tree-derived groupings explained more variance in clinical characteristics than existing severity definitions. Taken together, shape/weight overvaluation appears to be a more accurate marker of AN severity than BMI. The empirically determined AN severity scheme accounted for the most variance in clinical characteristics. Future research should assess the predictive value of these empirically defined AN severity indicators. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).