OBJECTIVE: The diagnostic concordance of the interview (EDE) and questionnaire (EDE-Q) versions of the Eating Disorder Examination was examined. METHOD: Two-hundred seventeen patients seeking eating disorder treatment completed the EDE and EDE-Q before beginning treatment. Diagnostic algorithms were generated for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition, text revision (DSM-IV-TR) and proposed Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria using data first from the EDE and then from the EDE-Q; thus, each participant received four diagnoses. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the EDE-Q for individual diagnoses ranged from 27.8% to 84.3% (DSM-IV-TR) and from 36.8% to 80.8% (DSM-5). The specificity of the EDE-Q for individual diagnoses ranged from 71.1% to 98.5% (DSM-IV-TR) and from 77.3% to 98.0% (DSM-5). The overall diagnostic concordance was moderate (κ = .57-.60). DISCUSSION: The proposed DSM-5 criteria improved the diagnostic concordance of the two instruments and reduced the prevalence of Eating Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (EDNOS). However, concordance improvement was modest and both instruments still diagnosed most respondents with EDNOS.
OBJECTIVE: The diagnostic concordance of the interview (EDE) and questionnaire (EDE-Q) versions of the Eating Disorder Examination was examined. METHOD: Two-hundred seventeen patients seeking eating disorder treatment completed the EDE and EDE-Q before beginning treatment. Diagnostic algorithms were generated for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition, text revision (DSM-IV-TR) and proposed Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria using data first from the EDE and then from the EDE-Q; thus, each participant received four diagnoses. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the EDE-Q for individual diagnoses ranged from 27.8% to 84.3% (DSM-IV-TR) and from 36.8% to 80.8% (DSM-5). The specificity of the EDE-Q for individual diagnoses ranged from 71.1% to 98.5% (DSM-IV-TR) and from 77.3% to 98.0% (DSM-5). The overall diagnostic concordance was moderate (κ = .57-.60). DISCUSSION: The proposed DSM-5 criteria improved the diagnostic concordance of the two instruments and reduced the prevalence of Eating Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (EDNOS). However, concordance improvement was modest and both instruments still diagnosed most respondents with EDNOS.
Authors: Katherine A Halmi; W Stewart Agras; Scott Crow; James Mitchell; G Terence Wilson; Susan W Bryson; Helena C Kraemer Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2005-07
Authors: Andrea P Mann; Erin C Accurso; Colleen Stiles-Shields; Lauren Capra; Zandre Labuschagne; Niranjan S Karnik; Daniel Le Grange Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2014-03-18 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Grace Rasmusson; Janet A Lydecker; Jaime A Coffino; Marney A White; Carlos M Grilo Journal: Int J Eat Disord Date: 2018-12-19 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Robyn Sysko; Deborah R Glasofer; Tom Hildebrandt; Patrycja Klimek; James E Mitchell; Kelly C Berg; Carol B Peterson; Stephen A Wonderlich; B Timothy Walsh Journal: Int J Eat Disord Date: 2015-01-30 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Emily M Pisetsky; Ann F Haynos; Jason M Lavender; Scott J Crow; Carol B Peterson Journal: Compr Psychiatry Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 3.735