ArticleJournal of eating disorders2026
A comparison of methods for calculating expected body mass indices among youth with eating disorders.
Article in Journal of eating disorders, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPercentage of median body mass index (mBMI) is an established method to calculate malnutrition severity for youth with eating disorders (ED) but does not account for individual variability in premorbid growth trajectories. We aimed to develop an individualized expected BMI (inBMI) measure and compare estimates of malnutrition severity derived from inBMI versus mBMI.
methodsUsing growth chart data for participants in a longitudinal ED registry (RECOVERY), we calculated percent of expected BMI at initial treatment presentation using two methods: (1) mBMI, the 50th percentile for age-and-sex, and (2) inBMI, defined as the 10% trimmed mean of each participant's premorbid BMI percentiles. We compared estimates of malnutrition severity between methods overall and by premorbid growth category.
resultsAmong 97 participants (mean age 15.7 years; 85% female), mean BMI percentile at presentation was 31.8 (SD = 26.6). A mean of 12.8 premorbid BMI measurements per participant were available to estimate inBMI. Mean %mBMI was 94.2 (SD = 17.7) vs. 86.8 (SD = 14.0) %inBMI, with modest correlation between measures (r = 0.29; p = 0.004), and mean difference (mBMI-inBMI) of 7.3 (SD = 19.2). Concordance between methods was high for those with premorbid growth trajectories in the 'normal' range (5th-84th). However, %mBMI was consistently lower than %inBMI for those with < 5th percentile trajectories (i.e., overestimating malnutrition) and higher for ≥ 85th trajectories (i.e., underestimating malnutrition).
conclusionsEstimates of malnutrition severity differed meaningfully when using population median vs. individual growth trajectories. Individualized expected BMIs may offer a patient-centered alternative for assessing malnutrition severity, particularly among youth with premorbid growth in under or overweight ranges.
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.