OBJECTIVE: To detect risk factors related with eating disorders. DESIGN: Descriptive, cross-sectional study. SETTING: 5 secondary schools in the Virgen de Rocío health area in Seville, Spain. PARTICIPANTS: 789 students enrolled in the first and second years of compulsory secondary school, and their families. MAIN MEASURES. Body mass index, risk behaviors related with food and exercise, influence of the mass media on models of desirable body types, and family climate. Data were obtained with three validated questionnaires: the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-40), the CIMEC-26, and the Family Environment Scale (FES). RESULTS: In 6.9% of the participants, BMI was between 15 and 17, reflecting slight malnutrition. On the EAT scale, 68 participants (8.8%) had scores that were indicative of illness or risk of illness, and 25 (3.3%) could be diagnosed as having eating behavior disorder according to DSM-IV criteria. According to the CIMEC questionnaire, 104 participants (13.5%) were found to be significantly vulnerable to media pressures, and 85 (11.1%) were considered highly vulnerable. Parents' comments on eating behavior were related with the results on the EAT-40 CIMEC questionnaires (P=.01). No statistically significant relationship was found between family climate scores and the scores on the EAT-40 or CIMEC questionnaires. Students in rural or suburban area schools scored higher on the EAT-40 (P=.04) and CIMEC (P=.01) than students in urban or city center schools. CONCLUSION: The identification of persons considered at risk will allow us to use primary prevention programs more efficiently.
OBJECTIVE: To detect risk factors related with eating disorders. DESIGN: Descriptive, cross-sectional study. SETTING: 5 secondary schools in the Virgen de Rocío health area in Seville, Spain. PARTICIPANTS: 789 students enrolled in the first and second years of compulsory secondary school, and their families. MAIN MEASURES. Body mass index, risk behaviors related with food and exercise, influence of the mass media on models of desirable body types, and family climate. Data were obtained with three validated questionnaires: the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-40), the CIMEC-26, and the Family Environment Scale (FES). RESULTS: In 6.9% of the participants, BMI was between 15 and 17, reflecting slight malnutrition. On the EAT scale, 68 participants (8.8%) had scores that were indicative of illness or risk of illness, and 25 (3.3%) could be diagnosed as having eating behavior disorder according to DSM-IV criteria. According to the CIMEC questionnaire, 104 participants (13.5%) were found to be significantly vulnerable to media pressures, and 85 (11.1%) were considered highly vulnerable. Parents' comments on eating behavior were related with the results on the EAT-40 CIMEC questionnaires (P=.01). No statistically significant relationship was found between family climate scores and the scores on the EAT-40 or CIMEC questionnaires. Students in rural or suburban area schools scored higher on the EAT-40 (P=.04) and CIMEC (P=.01) than students in urban or city center schools. CONCLUSION: The identification of persons considered at risk will allow us to use primary prevention programs more efficiently.