ArticleEating and weight disorders : EWD2025
The Dutch clinical impairment assessment: factor analysis and psychometric properties in a clinical eating disorder sample.
Article in Eating and weight disorders : EWD, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe present study reports on the psychometric properties of the Dutch translation of the clinical impairment assessment (CIA) questionnaire in female patients with eating disorders. The aim of this study was to determine the factor structure of the CIA as there are conflicting studies supporting a three-factor, bifactor, and single-factor model with a general factor and three specific factors.
methodsThe CIA was translated and administered to 321 female patients with various eating disorders receiving treatment in a specialized eating disorder center. Its factor structure, internal consistency, convergent validity, and sensitivity to change were investigated.
resultsConfirmatory factor analyses showed the best fit was a bifactor model with one strong general factor and three less strong specific factors for personal, social, and cognitive impairment. Furthermore, good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.91), good convergent validity between CIA global score and eating disorder examination questionnaire global score (r = 0.58; p < 0.001) and good sensitivity to change (t (115) = 13.76, p < 0.001) were found.
conclusionsThe Dutch CIA is a reliable and valid instrument to measure impairment secondary to eating disorder symptoms, but interpretations made from subscales scores should be used with caution. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, validation study.
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.