ArticleDiabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association2025
Correspondence between the Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised and eating disorder diagnosis: Examining the current cut-off for clinically significant eating disorder symptoms.
Article in Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A narrative systematic review of definitions and diagnostic criteria for disordered eating and eating disorders in type 1 diabetes.Diabetologia · 2026Pooled it
- Can the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) reliably identify eating disorder diagnosis in women with type 1 diabetes?Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Trial
- Assessing eating disorders in adults with type 1 diabetes: An item response theory analysis of the Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R).Psychological assessment · 2026Article
- Clinical and psychological phenotypes of type 1 diabetes and disordered eating derived from a case vignette series: T1DE phenotypes.Diabetologia · 2026Article
- Intentional Insulin Omission (Diabulimia) in Patients with Insulin-Dependent Diabetes: An Eating Disorder? A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Diabetes Distress and Glycemic Stability: The Mediating Role of Experiential Avoidance and Disordered Eating in Type 1 Diabetes.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2026Article
- Psychometric properties and factor structure of the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey Revised in Danish adolescents with type 1 diabetes.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Article
- Psychological Impact of Type 1 Diabetes: A Focus on Disordered Eating Behavior in Female Adolescents.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsEating disorders (EDs) are associated with severe health complications and early death in individuals with type 1 diabetes, making the accurate detection of EDs crucial so that treatment can be initiated. The Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) is commonly used to identify individuals with type 1 diabetes with a probable ED, with scores ≥20 recommended as a clinical cut-off. However, the correspondence between a score ≥20 and an ED diagnosis has yet to be examined. This study examines the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the DEPS-R ≥20 for detecting EDs in a sample of adults with type 1 diabetes participating in a study of eating and weight concerns.
methodsAdults with type 1 diabetes (N = 83) completed the DEPS-R and a structured diagnostic ED interview (Eating Disorder Examination [EDE]). Each participant's EDE and DEPS-R scores were dichotomized (EDE: 1 = ED diagnosis, 0 = otherwise; DEPS-R: 1 = DEPS-R ≥20, 0 = otherwise) and DEPS-R ≥20 accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for identifying EDs were calculated. A logistic regression was used to determine whether there was a significant association between the dichotomized EDE and DEPS-R scores.
resultsA DEPS-R ≥20 accurately detected the presence or absence of an ED in 81.8% of the cases, with a sensitivity of 76.7% and a specificity of 88.2%. The logistic regression exhibited a significant association between the EDE and DEPS-R binary variables (coefficient estimate = 3.2, 95% CI [2.0, 4.6]).
conclusionsWhile the majority of individuals with an ED were identified using DEPS-R ≥20, a subset failed to be detected. Clinicians should keep this in mind when using the DEPS-R and may consider additional screening methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.