ArticlePloS one2026
A mixed-methods validation of the Intuitive Eating Scale-2 for use with kidney transplant recipients.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects approximately 850 million people worldwide, imposing not only substantial health burdens but also complex dietary management challenges. For kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), dietary restrictions often lessen post-transplant, yet the transition to a 'normal' diet is fraught with difficulty after years of externally imposed rules. In this context, intuitive eating, which emphasises internal hunger and satiety cues over external dietary mandates, may support the development of sustainable, self-managed eating behaviours. Despite the recent publication of a third version of the scale, the Intuitive Eating Scale-2 (IES-2) is currently the most widely-used measure of intuitive eating, but it has not yet been validated for use with KTRs. To address this gap, a mixed-methods validation study was conducted, integrating qualitative thinkaloud interviews with KTRs and a quantitative survey involving KTRs and a non-CKD comparison group, to evaluate the face, factorial and construct validity and internal consistency of the IES-2 within this population. Results from both qualitative and quantitative workstreams revealed critical psychometric and conceptual issues with the 'Unconditional Permission to Eat' (UPE) subscale, including compromised item discrimination, construct validity, and reliability, as well as responses being systematically influenced by participants' experiences as KTRs. The original four-factor structure of the IES-2 was unsupported in both groups. Alternative models were tested, and an 11-item, three-factor structure excluding the UPE subscale demonstrated excellent fit across KTR and comparison samples. Although a third version of this scale now exists, there is no validation data available for people with kidney disease or solid organ transplantation, meaning these findings provide the first validated, contextually appropriate configuration of a scale of intuitive eating for use with KTRs, offering a robust tool to advance research and clinical practice in this population.
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.