Self-report versus clinical interview: Discordance among measures of binge eating in a weight-loss seeking sample
Self-report versus clinical interview: Discordance among measures of binge eating in a weight-loss seeking sample
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s40519-020-01002-6
复制
发表时间：
2020-09-12
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Forman, Evan M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Everett, Valerie S.;Crochiere, Rebecca J.;Forman, Evan M.
目的肥胖、寻求行为减肥（BWL）的个体可能容易过度报告暴饮暴食（be）。然而，许多研究依赖于这一人群的自我报告的BE测量，这可能是不准确的。因此，这是第一次研究在超重/肥胖寻求bbl的样本中，一种自我报告和一种临床管理的BE测量的一致性率。方法在BWL试验的基线，参与者（N = 94）完成了两项BE测量：饮食失调检查问卷（EDE- q）和基于访谈的饮食失调检查（EDE，暴饮暴食部分）。结果Cohen’s kappa检测到测量间一致性差（kappa < 0）。配对样本检验发现EDE- q组和EDE组的OBE频率存在显著差异，p < 0.001。与EDE相比，自我报告的EDE- q检测到的obe频率显著高于EDE （MEDE-Q = 0.73, SD = 1.29, m -EDE = 0.06, SD = 0.34）。ed - q检测到大约50%的参与者经历过脱体，而EDE检测到只有5%的参与者经历过脱体。ed - q检出率高于EDE检出率，差异有统计学意义，p < 0.001。讨论结果表明，一种自我报告的测量方法与“金标准”，即在超重/肥胖患者中寻求bbl的临床管理的BE测量方法之间的一致性不佳。ed - q显示出高灵敏度但低至中等特异性的oes，假阳性数量（41）超过真阳性数量(4)。在该人群中测量BE的研究应考虑完全依赖评估者管理的措施，因为该样本可能需要临床指导或澄清BE的定义和特征。
Purpose Obese, behavioral weight-loss (BWL) seeking individuals may be prone to over-reporting binge-eating (BE). However, many studies rely on self-reported measures of BE in this population, which may be inaccurate. As such, this is the first-ever study to examine the concordance rates among one self-reported and one clinician- administered measure of BE in a BWL-seeking sample with overweight/obesity. Methods At baseline of a BWL trial, participants(N = 94) completed two measures of BE: The Eating Disorders Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q) and the interview-based Eating Disorder Examination (EDE, Overeating section). Results Cohen's kappa detected poor agreement between measures (kappa < 0). A paired samplest-test detected large, significant differences in OBE frequency across the EDE-Q and EDE,p < 0.001. The self-reported EDE-Q detected a significantly greater frequency of OBEs compared to the EDE (MEDE-Q = 0.73, SD = 1.29 vs.M-EDE = 0.06, SD = 0.34). The EDE-Q detected that approximately 50% of participants have experienced OBEs, while the EDE detected that only 5% of participants have experienced OBEs. The frequency of OBEs detected by the EDE-Q was statistically greater than the frequency of OBEs detected by the EDE,p < 0.001. Discussion Results suggest poor agreement between one self-reported measure and the "gold-standard," clinician-administered measure of BE in a BWL-seeking sample with overweight/obesity. The EDE-Q exhibited high sensitivity but low-to-moderate specificity of OBEs, with the number of false positives (41) outweighing that of true positives (4). Studies measuring BE in this population should consider relying solely on assessor-administered measures, as this sample may require clinical guidance or clarification on the definition and features of BE.