DOI 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.11.012
Prevalence and clinical significance of night eating syndrome in university students.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Most studies of night eating syndrome (NES) fail to control for binge eating, despite moderate overlap between the two conditions. Establishing the independent clinical significance of NES is imperative for it to be considered worthy of clinical attention. We compared students with and without NES on eating disorder symptomatology, quality of life, and mental health, while exploring the role of binge eating in associations.
METHODS
Students (N = 1,636) ages 18-26 years (M = 20.9) recruited from 10 U.S. universities completed an online survey including the Night Eating Questionnaire (NEQ), Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q), Project Eating Among Teens, and the Health-Related Quality of Life-4. NES was diagnosed according to endorsement of proposed diagnostic criteria on the NEQ. Groups (NES vs. non-NES) were compared on all dependent variables and stratified by binge eating status in secondary analyses.
RESULTS
The prevalence of NES in our sample was 4.2%; it decreased to 2.9% after excluding those with binge eating. Body mass index did not differ between groups, but students with NES were significantly more likely to have histories of underweight and anorexia nervosa. In students with NES, EDE-Q scores were significantly higher; purging, laxative use, and compulsive exercise were more frequent; quality of life was reduced; and histories of depression, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and self-injury were more common. Binge eating did not account for all of these differences; the presence of it and NES was associated with additive risk for psychopathology on some items.
CONCLUSIONS
NES may be a distinct clinical entity from other DSM-5 eating disorders.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.