Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35503783›Full record

SynthesisThe International journal of eating disorders2022

Structural validity of the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire: A systematic review.

Paul E Jenkins, Renee D Rienecke

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The International journal of eating disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The Importance of Considering Personal Recovery for Eating Disorders.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire 9: A brief measure of eating pathology.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025
    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

2 authors.

Paul E JenkinsSchool of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1673-2903
Renee D RieneckeEating Recovery Center/Pathlight Mood & Anxiety Centers, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0423-7403

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe main aim was to perform a systematic literature review of studies investigating the factor structure of the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q), a widely used measure of eating pathology. Secondary aims were to summarize the quality of reporting of latent variable (factor) analyses in these studies and review support for different factor solutions.

methodLiterature was identified through Scopus, Medline, PsycInfo, and ProQuest databases published up to February 23, 2022 and outreach via an international listserv. All studies published in English reporting factor analysis of the EDE-Q were included with few restrictions. Sixty studies including 63,389 participants met inclusion criteria.

resultsThe originally proposed four-factor solution received little empirical support, although few alternative models have been robustly evaluated. Items assessing shape and weight concerns frequently coalesce in factor solutions, suggesting that these constructs are closely related. Investigations of brief versions of the EDE-Q have produced more consistent findings, suggesting that these measures, particularly a seven-item version, might be useful alternatives to the full version. Quality of studies was reasonable, with important methodological elements of factor analysis often reported. DISCUSSION: The findings are of relevance to practitioners and researchers, suggesting that the "original" factor structure of the EDE-Q should be reconsidered and that use of a seven-item version is to be encouraged. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE: Self-report questionnaires are widely used in the assessment of disordered eating. The current study found that there is little consensus about the structure of a common measure of eating psychopathology. There is more consistent support for a brief, seven-item, version assessing dietary restraint, body dissatisfaction, and overvaluation of weight and shape.

Indexed as

Feeding and Eating DisordersFactor Analysis, StatisticalHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnairesassessmenteating disorderEating Disorder Examination-Questionnairefactor analysispatient-reported outcome measurespsychometric

Identifiers

PMID35503783
PMCPMC9543786

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.