ArticleJournal of clinical psychology2026
Symptom Profiles Influence Accurate Identification of Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID).
Article in Journal of clinical psychology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSince its introduction in DSM-5, the diagnostic validity of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) has been scrutinized due to heterogeneity in the diagnostic criteria. While most research has focused on the criteria themselves, recent attention has shifted to the three motivating factors for ARFID - lack of interest in food and eating, sensitivity to sensory characteristics of food, and fear of aversive consequences of eating (e.g., choking). However, minimal research has explored how these symptom profiles influence clinician diagnostic accuracy.
methodLicensed mental health providers completed a survey using standardized vignettes to assess accuracy in diagnosing ARFID, variation in diagnostic accuracy across the three motivating factors, and clinician characteristics associated with accuracy and confidence of diagnosis. A vignette depicting major depression served as a control.
resultsA total of 122 participants completed the study. Diagnostic accuracy was lower for ARFID (68.9%) than major depression (95.1%). Accuracy also varied significantly across ARFID presentations: sensory sensitivity (94.0%), lack of interest in food and eating (72.7%), and fear of aversive consequences (46%). Eating disorder specialists were significantly more accurate and confident in their diagnoses than other clinicians. Prior experience treating ARFID was unrelated to accuracy or confidence.
conclusionFindings highlight challenges in accurately diagnosing ARFID and underscore the need for training on its diverse presentations. Improving clinician recognition of varied ARFID symptom profiles may enhance assessment and treatment.
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.