ArticlePsychological assessment2026
Assessing eating disorders in adults with type 1 diabetes: An item response theory analysis of the Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R).
Article in Psychological assessment, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The 16-item Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) is one of the few instruments assessing disordered eating behaviors (DEBs) in Type 1 diabetes (T1D). Although a DEPS-R total score of ≥20 is oft used to identify a probable eating disorder, previous work has shown that some items may reflect T1D management struggles, rather than DEB, with other work indicating that different response profiles (e.g., overeating vs. diabulimia) correspond to varying DEB risks. To identify DEPS-R items of greatest utility in detecting DEB in T1D, we used a form of item response theory to evaluate item variation in difficulty and discrimination, as well as scale precision across the latent DEB continuum. Participants were 329 adults with T1D who completed the DEPS-R when joining a participant registry or enrolling in a study on eating and weight concerns in T1D. We found a number of DEPS-R items (e.g., "I skip meals or snacks") that demonstrated low difficulty and low-to-moderate discrimination. These items were often endorsed by even the lowest severity participants yet provided relatively limited information for differentiating the DEB construct. Other items with high difficulty and moderate discrimination (e.g., "I make myself vomit") provided relatively modest information even at the highest pathology levels, as they were unlikely to be endorsed even by the most severe cases. Most high-discrimination items provided the most diagnostic information at the highest pathology levels (e.g., "I try to eat to the point of spilling ketones in my urine"). Results suggest revising the DEPS-R scale, as several items provided limited contribution to DEB detection. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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.