ArticleJournal of clinical psychology in medical settings2026
Preliminary Validation of Two Brief Screening Measures for Eating Disorders in Adults with Chronic Pain.
Article in Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Chronic pain and eating problems frequently co-occur, with disordered eating behaviors such as emotional eating, food restriction, and appetite fluctuation contributing to adverse outcomes. However, there are no validated screening tools specifically designed for assessing eating problems in chronic pain populations. This study aimed to validate two brief eating disorder measures, the Eating Attitudes Test-8 (EAT-8) and Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire-8 (EDE-Q8), for English-speaking adults presenting for chronic pain treatment. Participants included 173 adults seeking treatment at a pain evaluation service. Participants completed the EAT-8 and EDE-Q8 alongside self-report clinical measures. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from medical records. Statistical analyses assessed internal reliability, construct validity, and differences in eating disorder measures by BMI and eating disorder history. Both the EAT-8 and EDE-Q8 demonstrated acceptable internal reliability (McDonald's omega ≥ 0.7) and strong construct validity, with significant correlation between the two measures (r = 0.77). Scores varied significantly by BMI and eating disorder history, with higher scores observed among participants with obese BMI or a history of eating disorders. However, less than 20% of participants felt the measures fully captured their experiences, suggesting potential gaps in assessing eating problems specific to chronic pain. The EAT-8 and EDE-Q8 are valid and reliable tools for identifying disordered eating behaviors in chronic pain patients. However, these measures may not capture the full spectrum of eating problems unique to this population. Future research should refine screening tools to better assess eating behaviors as they relate to chronic pain.
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.