ArticleThe International journal of eating disorders2019
The classification of eating disorders in China: A categorical model or a dimensional model.
Article in The International journal of eating disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiple mediation of the association between childhood emotional abuse and adult obesity by anxiety and bulimia - a sample from bariatric surgery candidates and healthy controls.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Validation of the 12-item Short Form of the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire in the Chinese context: confirmatory factor analysis and Rasch analysis.Eating and weight disorders : EWD · 2021Article
- Trends in the prevalence and disability-adjusted life years of eating disorders from 1990 to 2017: results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2020Article
- An examination of eating and thinness expectancies as predictors of eating disturbances in females: evidence for cultural differences between European American and Chinese college students.Eating and weight disorders : EWD · 2020Article
- The classification of eating disorders in China: A categorical model or a dimensional model.The International journal of eating disorders · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAccording to the ICD-10 and DSM-5, eating disorders (EDs) are classified using a categorical model that assumes the subtypes are qualitatively different from one another. However, it is still intensely debated that a dimensional model is more suitable. The aim of this study is to examine whether EDs have a categorical or dimensional latent structure using a sample of Chinese ED patients.
methodThe sample included 322 patients, diagnosed with an ED from 2010 to 2017 in the Shanghai Mental Health Center, and comparison participants (N = 850), recruited from undergraduate students in one university in Shanghai. Participants were evaluated with the Eating Disorder Inventory-2 (EDI-2) questionnaire and another questionnaire developed by the researchers. Three taxometric procedures (MAXimum EIGenvalue [MAXEIG], latent-mode factor analysis [L-Mode], and Mean Above Minus Below A Cut [MAMBAC]) were applied, respectively, to analyze the patients' clinical symptoms data.
resultsPatients were divided into three groups according to their clinical diagnosis. The plots of the three taxometric analysis procedures supported the categorical construct in anorexia nervosa, binge-eating/purging group, and bulimia nervosa group. The Comparison Curve Fit Indices of the MAXEIG, L-Mode, and MAMBAC procedures were 0.694, 0.709, 0.704 in the AN-BP group and 0.727, 0.67, 0.62 in the BN group, respectively, which also support the categorical construct. DISCUSSION: The results support two distinct classes of ED subtypes among Chinese sample. Further work on applying hybrid model in analysis has been discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.