Rachel Bryant-Waugh1,2, Nadia Micali2,3, Lucy Cooke1,2, Elizabeth A Lawson4,5, Kamryn T Eddy6,7, Jennifer J Thomas6,7. 1. Feeding Disorders Team, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. 2. Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. 4. Neuroendocrine Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Eating Disorders Clinical and Research Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 7. Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID), pica, and rumination disorder (RD) were added to the revised DSM-5 Feeding and Eating Disorders chapter in 2013. We developed a structured interview-the Pica, ARFID, and Rumination Disorder Interview (PARDI)-to assess the presence and severity of these diagnoses for evaluation and treatment planning in clinical and research settings. Here, we describe the development of the PARDI and provide a preliminary report on feasibility, acceptability, reliability, and validity in relation to ARFID. METHOD: We created an initial item pool from existing measures of similar constructs and clinical experience. The PARDI includes items assessing the level of endorsement and overall severity of common ARFID features organized into profiles (i.e., sensory sensitivity, lack of interest in eating, and fear of aversive consequences) and algorithms for diagnosing ARFID, pica, and RD. We collected initial psychometric data from participants (10-22 years) with ARFID (n = 39), clinically significant avoidant/restrictive eating (n = 8), and healthy controls (n = 10). RESULTS: On average, the PARDI took 39 min to complete and was acceptable to participants. All subscales achieved internal consistency greater ≥0.77, and inter-rater reliability for the ARFID diagnosis was moderate (κ = 0.75). Individuals with ARFID scored significantly higher than healthy controls on ARFID severity and ARFID profiles. DISCUSSION: The PARDI appears acceptable to respondents and preliminary evidence of reliability and validity has been demonstrated in an initial sample. Larger-scale validation studies are currently underway. The PARDI is freely available to clinicians and researchers.
OBJECTIVE: Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID), pica, and rumination disorder (RD) were added to the revised DSM-5 Feeding and Eating Disorders chapter in 2013. We developed a structured interview-the Pica, ARFID, and Rumination Disorder Interview (PARDI)-to assess the presence and severity of these diagnoses for evaluation and treatment planning in clinical and research settings. Here, we describe the development of the PARDI and provide a preliminary report on feasibility, acceptability, reliability, and validity in relation to ARFID. METHOD: We created an initial item pool from existing measures of similar constructs and clinical experience. The PARDI includes items assessing the level of endorsement and overall severity of common ARFID features organized into profiles (i.e., sensory sensitivity, lack of interest in eating, and fear of aversive consequences) and algorithms for diagnosing ARFID, pica, and RD. We collected initial psychometric data from participants (10-22 years) with ARFID (n = 39), clinically significant avoidant/restrictive eating (n = 8), and healthy controls (n = 10). RESULTS: On average, the PARDI took 39 min to complete and was acceptable to participants. All subscales achieved internal consistency greater ≥0.77, and inter-rater reliability for the ARFID diagnosis was moderate (κ = 0.75). Individuals with ARFID scored significantly higher than healthy controls on ARFID severity and ARFID profiles. DISCUSSION: The PARDI appears acceptable to respondents and preliminary evidence of reliability and validity has been demonstrated in an initial sample. Larger-scale validation studies are currently underway. The PARDI is freely available to clinicians and researchers.
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: Charlotte B Delaney; Kamryn T Eddy; Andrea S Hartmann; Anne E Becker; Helen B Murray; Jennifer J Thomas Journal: Int J Eat Disord Date: 2014-04-11 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Kendra R Becker; Ani C Keshishian; Rachel E Liebman; Kathryn A Coniglio; Shirley B Wang; Debra L Franko; Kamryn T Eddy; Jennifer J Thomas Journal: Int J Eat Disord Date: 2018-12-22 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Helen B Murray; Adrienne S Juarascio; Carlo Di Lorenzo; Douglas A Drossman; Jennifer J Thomas Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: P Evelyna Kambanis; Megan C Kuhnle; Olivia B Wons; Jenny H Jo; Ani C Keshishian; Kristine Hauser; Kendra R Becker; Debra L Franko; Madhusmita Misra; Nadia Micali; Elizabeth A Lawson; Kamryn T Eddy; Jennifer J Thomas Journal: Int J Eat Disord Date: 2019-11-08 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Stephanie G Harshman; Jenny Jo; Megan Kuhnle; Kristine Hauser; Helen Burton Murray; Kendra R Becker; Madhusmita Misra; Kamryn T Eddy; Nadia Micali; Elizabeth A Lawson; Jennifer J Thomas Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2021-09-07 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Jennifer J Thomas; Kendra R Becker; Megan C Kuhnle; Jenny H Jo; Stephanie G Harshman; Olivia B Wons; Ani C Keshishian; Kristine Hauser; Lauren Breithaupt; Rachel E Liebman; Madhusmita Misra; Sabine Wilhelm; Elizabeth A Lawson; Kamryn T Eddy Journal: Int J Eat Disord Date: 2020-08-09 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Helen Burton Murray; Melissa J Dreier; Hana F Zickgraf; Kendra R Becker; Lauren Breithaupt; Kamryn T Eddy; Jennifer J Thomas Journal: Int J Eat Disord Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 4.861