ArticlePloS one2025
Psychometric validation of the Turkish expanded mindful eating scale.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mindful eating and Chrono-Mediterranean diet adherence associated with lower gastrointestinal symptom burden in young adults.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Motivation for physical activity participation and mindful eating in university students: a cross-sectional study using variable-centered regression and latent profile analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThe Expanded Mindful Eating Scale (EMES) assesses mindfulness by considering both individual health and environmental sustainability. A distinguishing feature of the EMES is its inclusion of sustainability, setting it apart from other eating awareness scales. This study was carried out to determine the validity and reliability of the Turkish culture-adapted version of the EMES in adults. MATERIALS/
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, 662 Turkish adults (mean age=29.8, SD=12.18; 18.4% male) were recruited via an online questionnaire. In this study, participants were recruited via an online survey that included their sociodemographic characteristics, the EMES, Mindful Eating Questionnaire (MEQ), and sick, control, one, fat, food (SCOFF) Eating Disorders Scale. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test the validity of the EMES. Analyses were conducted using SPSS version 25.0 and SPSS AMOS version 25.0. The 5-factor structure identified by Explanatory Factor Analysis (EFA) was validated using CFA.
resultsAs a result of confirmatory factor analysis (RMSEA: 0.053, CFI: 0.89, GFI: 0.94, and AGFI: 0.92), model fit indices were obtained within acceptable limits. In the reliability analysis, it was observed that the EMES scale had a good level of reliability with the Spearman-Brown coefficient. A significant correlation was observed between the EMES and MEQ.
conclusionThe results showed that the use of the Turkish version of the EMES is valid and reliable. It is thought that the validation of the Expanded Mindful Eating Scale reflects a comprehensive approach that recognizes the interconnectedness of individual health and environmental well-being.
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.