Objective Individuals with a gastrointestinal (GI) disorder often alter their diet to manage GI symptoms, adding complexity to understanding the diverse motivations contributing to food avoidance/restriction. When a GI disorder is present, the DSM‐5 states that Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID) can be diagnosed only when eating disturbance exceeds that expected. There is limited guidance to make this determination. This study attempts to address this gap by characterizing the presentation of ARFID in adults with and without a self‐reported GI disorder. Method Participants were 2,610 adults ages 18–44 who self‐identified as “picky eaters.” Participants reported on motivations for food avoidance, affective experiences towards food, and perceived impairment. Responses were compared across four groups: GI issues and likely ARFID (L‐ARFID/GI), L‐ARFID‐only, GI‐only, and No‐ARFID/No‐GI. Results Groups with a GI disorder (L‐ARFID/GI, GI‐only) reported more fear of aversive consequences of eating than those without a GI disorder, while groups with L‐ARFID (L‐ARFID, L‐ARFID/GI) evidenced significantly greater sensory aversion to food and indifference to food or eating, negative emotional reactions to food and overall disgust sensitivity, and eating related impairment. Discussion Consideration of the interplay of a GI disorder with ARFID can add precision to case conceptualization. Food avoidance may be attempts to manage fears of aversive consequences that are augmented by a history of GI symptoms, while sensory aversions and negative emotional reactions towards foods may be more elevated in ARFID. These findings emphasize the need to consider an ARFID diagnosis in patients with GI disorders to optimize care.

No abstract

Objective To characterize helpful parent feeding strategies using reflections on childhood eating experiences of adults with symptoms of Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID). Method We explored a unique text‐based dataset gathered from a population of N = 19,239 self‐identified adult “picky eaters.” The sample included adults with symptoms of ARFID as evidenced by marked interference in psychosocial functioning, weight loss/sustained low weight, and/or nutritional deficiency (likely ARFID), and non‐ARFID participants. We leveraged state‐of‐the‐art natural language processing (NLP) methods to classify feeding strategies that were perceived as helpful or not helpful. The best classifiers that distinguished helpful approaches were further analyzed using qualitative coding according to a grounded theory approach. Results NLP reliably and accurately classified the perceived helpfulness of caregivers' feeding strategies (82%) and provided information about features of helpful parent strategies using recollections of adults with varying degrees of food avoidance. Strategies perceived as forceful were regarded as not helpful. Positive and encouraging strategies were perceived as helpful in improving attitudes toward food and minimizing social discomfort around eating. Although food variety improved, adults still struggled with a degree of avoidance/restriction. Discussion Adults perceived that positive parent feeding strategies were helpful even though they continued to experience some degree of food avoidance. Creating a positive emotional context surrounding food and eating with others may help to eliminate psychosocial impairment and increase food approach in those with severe food avoidance. Nevertheless, additional tools to optimize parent strategies and improve individuals' capacity to incorporate avoided foods and cope with challenging eating situations are needed.

Functional abdominal pain (FAP) is one of the most common childhood medical complaints, associated with significant distress and impairment. Little is known about how children understand their pain. Do they attribute it to personal weakness? Do they perceive pain as having global impact, affecting a variety of activities? How do they cope with pain? We explored the pain beliefs of 5- to 9-year-old children with FAP using a novel Teddy Bear Interview task in which children answered questions about a Teddy bear’s pain. Responses were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. Results indicate that the majority of young children with FAP are optimistic about pain outcomes. Children generated many types of coping strategies for Teddy’s pain and adjusted their calibration of Teddy’s pain tolerance dependent on the activity being performed. Early warning signs also emerged: a subset of children were pessimistic about Teddy’s pain, and several children identified coping strategies that, while developmentally appropriate, could lead to excessive help seeking if not intervened upon (e.g., physician consultation and shot). The Teddy Bear Interview allows children to externalize their pain, making it a useful tool to access cognitive pain constructs in younger children. Thus, these findings highlight the importance of early intervention for childhood FAP.

No abstract