Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33025525›Full record

ArticleEating and weight disorders : EWD2021

The Polish version of the Düsseldorf Orthorexia Scale (PL-DOS) and its comparison with the English version of the DOS (E-DOS).

Anna Brytek-Matera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Eating and weight disorders : EWD, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Anna Brytek-MateraInstitute of Psychology, University of Wroclaw, Dawida 1, 50-527, Wrocław, Poland. anna.brytek-matera@uwr.edu.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5178-371X

Funding

Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego BST/WZK/2018/A/01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAlthough orthorexia nervosa, the fixation on health-conscious eating behaviour, was first described in the 90 s, there is no clear understanding whether existing ON measures are appropriate for its assessment. The objectives of the present study were to: (1) examine the psychometric properties of the Polish version of the DOS (PL-DOS) and to compare the PL-DOS with the English version of the DOS (E-DOS) as well as (2) evaluate the prevalence of ON among Polish university students and compare the prevalence rates of ON among Polish and U.S. students.

methodsFour-hundred and twelve students (77.2% female) with a mean age of 24.62 years (SD = 6.86) participated in the present study. All participants completed the Polish version of the Düsseldorf Orthorexia Scale (PL-DOS), the Eating Habits Questionnaire (EHQ) and the Eating Disorder Inventory (EDI).

resultsReliability analysis for the PL-DOS showed strong internal consistency with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.840 and a coefficient omega of 0.840, 95% CI [0.808, 0.866]. Significant correlation coefficients were found between the PL-DOS and all subscales of the EHQ. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the one-factor model had poor fit. Polish students had an ON prevalence rate of 6.6%, lower than that of U.S. students (8%).

conclusionsOur findings validate the use of the PL-DOS as an appropriate ON measure for a Polish population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, cross-sectional descriptive study.

Indexed as

Feeding and Eating DisordersAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalePolandPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultDOSEating behavioursOrthorexia nervosaPrevalence

Identifiers

PMID33025525
PMCPMC8062342

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.