Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38124134›Full record

ArticleJournal of eating disorders2023

Psychometric properties of self-report measures of eating disorder cognitions: a systematic review.

Amaani H Hatoum, Amy L Burton, Sophie L Berry, Maree J Abbott

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of eating disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Amaani H HatoumSchool of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Level 2, 94 Mallet Street, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. amaani.hatoum@sydney.edu.au.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1806-9087
Amy L BurtonSchool of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Level 2, 94 Mallet Street, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6641-6442
Sophie L BerryGraduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-4982-3882
Maree J AbbottSchool of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Level 2, 94 Mallet Street, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2188-4664
University of Technology Sydney · AUThe University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough eating disorder (ED) models display some differences in theory and treatment approach, cognitive-behavioural, schema-focused, and disorder-specific models all highlight the fundamental nature of cognitions as key factors in ED development and maintenance processes. As such, it is vital that ED cognitions continue to be assessed and monitored as therapeutic targets and treatment outcomes as well as being examined as constructs in empirical research. This review aimed to systematically identify and evaluate the psychometric properties of existing self-report measures of ED cognitions.

methodsA systematic review protocol was registered using the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42023440840). Included studies described the development, validation and/or the psychometric evaluation of a measure (or subscale) that was specifically developed to solely assess ED cognitions (that is thoughts, expectations, assumptions, or beliefs), in English-speaking, adult populations. The search was conducted using three electronic databases: PsycINFO, MedLine, and Embase. Two independent reviewers conducted screening, selection and evaluation of the psychometric properties of relevant measures using a standardised, well-established quality appraisal tool.

resultsOf the initial search of 7581 potential studies, 59 met inclusion criteria and described the psychometric evaluation of 31 measures (or subscales) of ED cognitions. The findings from the current review indicate that of the included measures, none currently meet all nine criteria of adequate psychometric properties. The Eating Beliefs Questionnaire (EBQ; and EBQ-18), and the Eating Disorder Inventory Body Dissatisfaction subscale (EDI [BD]) currently possess the most evidence supporting their validity, reliability, and clinical utility.

conclusionsThe findings of the current systematic review provide guidance for future researchers to focus efforts on improving evidence for the validity, reliability and utility of self-report measures of ED cognitions. Overall, the present study has provided a detailed and systematic evaluation to support researchers and clinicians in future selection of measures of ED cognitions dependent on the specific aims of their research and treatment.

Indexed as

CognitiveEating disordersPsychometricSelf-reportSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38124134
PMCPMC10734145
OpenAlexW4389993587

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.