Severity of Binge-Eating Disorder and Its Effects on Treatment Outcome

Dakanalis, Antonios; Clerici, Massimo

doi:10.4088/jcp.17lr11589

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A total of 9,196 individuals (6,990 females) participated in the studies reviewed. Thirteen studies used clinical samples with predominantly adult females (i.e., 82% females; Dakanalis, Bartoli, et al, 2017; Dakanalis & Clerici, 2017; Dakanalis, Colmegna, et al, 2017; Dakanalis, Riva, et al, 2017; Dakanalis, Timko, et al, 2018; Forrest et al, 2020; Gianini et al, 2017; Gorrell et al, 2019; Grilo et al, 2015a; Jenkins et al, 2016; Machado et al, 2017; Nakai et al, 2017; Zayas et al, 2018). Two studies comprised mainly adult females from the community (i.e., 70% females; Grilo et al, 2015b, 2015c).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the DSM–5 severity ratings for eating disorders.

Dang¹,

Giles²,

Fuller‐Tyszkiewicz³

et al. 2022

Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current review assessed the clinical utility of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM–5) and alternative severity ratings for eating disorders (EDs) in their ability to distinguish ED psychopathology between the severity groups and frequency distribution of these severity ratings. EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, and ProQuest were used to identify relevant academic and grey literature published between 2013 and June 2021. Twenty-two studies were retrieved for the systematic review, and 19 studies qualified for the meta-analyses. We found that individuals with anorexia nervosa (AN) and bulimia nervosa (BN) were close to evenly represented across the DSM–5 severity groups. Conversely, approximately 82% of those with binge eating disorder (BED) were categorized into the mild and the moderate severity groups. In terms of differences across the DSM–5 severity groups for ED symptomatology, we found various significant differences for BN (g = .23–1.23), but only a few significant differences for AN (g = .002–.30) and BED (g = .13–1.55). Finally, using the alternative ED severity rating overvaluation of weight and shape, significant differences were observed in ED psychopathology between the low and high weight/shape overvaluation BED severity groups (g = .13–1.23). The findings of this review provide support for the clinical utility of the DSM–5 severity ratings in BN, but not in AN or BED, and suggest an alternative severity classification for BED based on overvaluation of weight and shape that may have utility as a severity indicator.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the DSM–5 severity ratings for eating disorders.

Dang¹,

Giles²,

Fuller‐Tyszkiewicz³

et al. 2022

Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The effect sizes for the observed between‐group differences in restraint (0.17) shape (0.21), weight (0.21), and eating concern (0.24), interpersonal problems (0.24), body surveillance (0.16), perfectionism (0.12), low self‐esteem (0.19) and BMI‐SDS (0.24) were in the moderate range. Conversely, the effect sizes for the observed between‐group differences in mood intolerance (0.51), health‐related quality of life (0.48) and mood (0.45) and anxiety (0.46) disorder comorbidity, were large, highlighting these variables as salient targets in BED treatment (e.g., Dakanalis & Clerici, 2017; Tsappis et al, 2016). In absolute terms, mood intolerance was the primary variable distinguishing the severity groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If, in future research, adolescents with mild, moderate, severe and extreme severity of BED show a differential response to therapy (CBT and/or treatment other than CBT; Tsappis et al, 2016), this will provide evidence for the predictive validity of the DSM‐5 severity indicator in youth, which is currently lacking. It will also be informative for promoting more appropriate treatment “for severe‐to‐extreme BED, since this should differ from treatment regimens for mild‐to‐moderate presentations” (Dakanalis & Clerici, 2017, p. 841).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classifying binge eating‐disordered adolescents based on severity levels

Dakanalis

Zanetti

Colmegna

et al. 2017

Journal of Adolescence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The new severity criterion for binge-eating disorder (BED), introduced by the most recent (fifth) edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) as a means of addressing within-group variability in severity, was tested in 223 Italian (13-18-year-old) adolescents (86.1% females) with (DSM-5) BED presenting for treatment. Analyses revealed that participants classified with mild (35.9% of the sample), moderate (38.1%) severe (13.4%), and extreme (12.6%) severity of BED, based on their clinician-rated weekly frequency of binge-eating (BE) episodes, were statistically distinguishable in physical characteristics (body mass index) and a range of clinical variables regarding eating-related psychopathology and putative maintenance factors, health-related quality of life, and mood and anxiety disorder comorbidity (medium-tolarge effect sizes). Between-group differences in age-at-onset of BED or demographics were not detected. The findings provide support for the utility of BE frequency as a severity criterion for BED in adolescence. Implications for future studies are discussed.

show abstract

Severity of Binge-Eating Disorder and Its Effects on Treatment Outcome

Cited by 2 publications

References 19 publications

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the DSM–5 severity ratings for eating disorders.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the DSM–5 severity ratings for eating disorders.

Classifying binge eating‐disordered adolescents based on severity levels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About