A consensus document on definition and diagnostic criteria for orthorexia nervosa.
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Donini Lorenzo M, Barrada Juan Ramón, Barthels Friederike, Dunn Thomas M, Babeau Camille, Brytek-Matera Anna, Cena Hellas, Cerolini Silvia, Cho Hye-Hyun, Coimbra Maria, Cuzzolaro Massimo, Ferreira Claudia, Galfano Valeria, Grammatikopoulou Maria G, Hallit Souheil, Håman Linn, Hay Phillipa, Jimbo Masahito, Lasson Clotilde, Lindgren Eva-Carin, McGregor Renee, Minnetti Marianna, Mocini Edoardo, Obeid Sahar, Oberle Crystal D, Onieva-Zafra Maria-Dolores, Opitz Marie-Christine, Parra-Fernández María-Laura, Pietrowsky Reinhard, Plasonja Natalija, Poggiogalle Eleonora, Rigó Adrien, Rodgers Rachel F, Roncero Maria, Saldaña Carmina, Segura-Garcia Cristina, Setnick Jessica, Shin Ji-Yeon, Spitoni Grazia, Strahler Jana, Stroebele-Benschop Nanette, Todisco Patrizia, Vacca Mariacarolina, Valente Martina, Varga Màrta, Zagaria Andrea, Zickgraf Hana Flynn, Reynolds Rebecca C, Lombardo Caterina
Аннотация
METHODS: 47 eating disorder researchers and multidisciplinary treatment specialists from 14 different countries across four continents completed a three-phase modified Delphi process, with 75% agreement determined as the threshold for a statement to be included in the final consensus document. In phase I, participants were asked via online survey to agree or disagree with 67 statements about ON in four categories: A-Definition, Clinical Aspects, Duration; B-Consequences; C-Onset; D-Exclusion Criteria, and comment on their rationale. Responses were used to modify the statements which were then provided to the same participants for phase II, a second round of feedback, again in online survey form. Responses to phase II were used to modify and improve the statements for phase III, in which statements that met the predetermined 75% of agreement threshold were provided for review and commentary by all participants.
RESULTS: 27 statements met or exceeded the consensus threshold and were compiled into proposed diagnostic criteria for ON.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first time a standardized definition of ON has been developed from a worldwide, multidisciplinary cohort of experts. It represents a summary of observations, clinical expertise, and research findings from a wide base of knowledge. It may be used as a base for diagnosis, treatment protocols, and further research to answer the open questions that remain, particularly the functional consequences of ON and how it might be prevented or identified and intervened upon in its early stages. Although the participants encompass many countries and disciplines, further research will be needed to determine if these diagnostic criteria are applicable to the experience of ON in geographic areas not represented in the current expert panel.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V: opinions of expert committees.