Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38730431›Full record

ArticleJournal of eating disorders2024

Screening for eating disorders in adolescents with chronic pain: the Eating Attitudes Test-16-Chronic Pain.

Leslie Sim, Amy Fahrenkamp, Jennifer R Geske, Jocelyn Lebow, Hope Thilges, Carol B Peterson, Abigail Matthews, Cynthia Harbeck-Weber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of eating disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Leslie SimDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. sim.leslie@mayo.edu.
Amy FahrenkampPain, Palliative Care, and Integrative Medicine Department, Children's Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Jennifer R GeskeDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Rochester, MN, USA.
Jocelyn LebowDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Hope ThilgesDepartment of Psychology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA.
Carol B PetersonDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Abigail MatthewsDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Cynthia Harbeck-WeberDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFew measures have been validated to screen for eating disorders (ED) in youth with chronic pain. We conducted confirmatory (CFA) of two established factor structures of the Eating Attitudes Test-26 (EAT-26) in a sample of youth with chronic pain attending an intensive interdisciplinary pain treatment (IIPT) program and examined the validity of the best-fitting model in predicting ED diagnoses in this sample.

methodsParticipants were 880 adolescents (M age = 16.1, SD = 2.1) consecutively admitted into an IIPT program who completed the EAT-26 upon admission. CFA was conducted and in the case of inadequate fit, EFA was planned to identify alternative models. Factors of the best-fitting model were included in a logistic regression analysis to predict ED diagnoses.

resultsThe TLIs (0.70; 0.90), RMSEAs (0.09; 0.07) and CFIs (0.73; 0.92) suggested poor fit of one model and adequate of the second model. Goodness of fit indices from EFA (TLI:0.85, RMSEA:0.06) did not outperform the fit of the second CFA. As such, the second model was retained with the exception of one factor. The items loaded onto a 16-item, five factor model: Fear of Getting Fat, Social Pressure to Gain Weight, Eating-Related Control, Eating-Related Guilt and Food Preoccupation. Based on chart review, 19.1% of the participants were diagnosed with an eating disorder. Logistic regression analyses indicated the new 16-item measure and Fear of Getting Fat, significantly predicted an ED diagnosis that did not include avoidant restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) and Social Pressure to Gain Weight significantly predicted a diagnosis of ARFID.

conclusionsAn alternative 16-item, 5-factor structure of the EAT-26 should be considered in screening for EDs with youth with chronic pain.

Indexed as

AdolescentsChronic painEating disordersFactor analysis

Identifiers

PMID38730431
PMCPMC11084020

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.