Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36821359›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2023

Toward Individualized Prediction of Binge-Eating Episodes Based on Ecological Momentary Assessment Data: Item Development and Pilot Study in Patients With Bulimia Nervosa and Binge-Eating Disorder.

Ann-Kathrin Arend, Tim Kaiser, Björn Pannicke, Julia Reichenberger, Silke Naab, Ulrich Voderholzer, Jens Blechert

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Changes in Eating Disorder Symptoms in Perinatal US Military Servicewomen.The International journal of eating disorders · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Ann-Kathrin ArendDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3024-9328
Tim KaiserDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6307-5347
Björn PannickeDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3496-2924
Julia ReichenbergerDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4982-410X
Silke NaabSchoen Clinic Roseneck, Prien am Chiemsee, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9084-196X
Ulrich VoderholzerSchoen Clinic Roseneck, Prien am Chiemsee, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0261-3145
Jens BlechertDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3820-109X
University of Salzburg · ATSchön Klinik Roseneck · DEUniversität Greifswald · DEUniversity Medical Center Freiburg · DE

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF KLI 762
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevention of binge eating through just-in-time mobile interventions requires the prediction of respective high-risk times, for example, through preceding affective states or associated contexts. However, these factors and states are highly idiographic; thus, prediction models based on averages across individuals often fail.

objectiveWe developed an idiographic, within-individual binge-eating prediction approach based on ecological momentary assessment (EMA) data.

methodsWe first derived a novel EMA-item set that covers a broad set of potential idiographic binge-eating antecedents from literature and an eating disorder focus group (n=11). The final EMA-item set (6 prompts per day for 14 days) was assessed in female patients with bulimia nervosa or binge-eating disorder. We used a correlation-based machine learning approach (Best Items Scale that is Cross-validated, Unit-weighted, Informative, and Transparent) to select parsimonious, idiographic item subsets and predict binge-eating occurrence from EMA data (32 items assessing antecedent contextual and affective states and 12 time-derived predictors).

resultsOn average 67.3 (SD 13.4; range 43-84) EMA observations were analyzed within participants (n=13). The derived item subsets predicted binge-eating episodes with high accuracy on average (mean area under the curve 0.80, SD 0.15; mean 95% CI 0.63-0.95; mean specificity 0.87, SD 0.08; mean sensitivity 0.79, SD 0.19; mean maximum reliability of r

conclusionsPredicting binge-eating episodes from psychological and contextual states seems feasible and accurate, but the predictor sets are highly idiographic. This has practical implications for mobile health and just-in-time adaptive interventions. Furthermore, current theories around binge eating need to account for this high between-person variability and broaden the scope of potential antecedent factors. Ultimately, a radical shift from purely nomothetic models to idiographic prediction models and theories is required.

Indexed as

Best Items Scales that are Cross-validated, Unit-weighted, Informative and Transparentbinge eatingBISCUITEcological Momentary Assessment (EMA)focus groupidiographicindividualizedJust-In-Time Adaptive Intervention (JITAI)literature researchmachine learningN of 1prediction algorithm

Identifiers

PMID36821359
PMCPMC9999257
OpenAlexW4312769377

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.