The International journal of eating disorders · 2025
Validating Online Parent- and Self-Report Screening Methods for Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Ortiz Shelby N, White Jennifer P, MacDermod Casey M, Dinkler Lisa, Thornton Laura M, Johnson Jessica, Guintivano Jerry D, Baker Jessica H, Bulik Cynthia M, Micali Nadia, Pisetsky Emily M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Although several assessments have been developed to diagnose or measure avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) symptoms, few studies have validated these tools in nonclinical and adult samples. This study explored the validity of two self- and parent/guardian-report ARFID screening measures in identifying adults and children who may have ARFID within a large community sample.
METHOD: Fifty participants (divided into two groups: 25 adults and 25 parents/guardians of children) were selected from the ARFID Genes and Environment study, which enrolled over 3000 adults and parents/guardians of children who screened positive for ARFID on either the Pica, ARFID, and Rumination Disorder Interview-ARFID Questionnaire (PARDI-AR-Q) or the Nine Item ARFID Screen (NIAS) self- and parent/guardian-report measures. Participants then completed the ARFID portion of the Pica, ARFID, and Rumination Disorder Interview (PARDI) to determine ARFID diagnosis.
RESULTS: Correlations between the PARDI-AR-Q and PARDI (r = 0.31-0.67) were weaker than the correlations between the NIAS and PARDI (r = 0.53-0.64) in both groups. The diagnostic positive predictive value for the PARDI-AR-Q was numerically higher (adults = 55.0%; parents/guardians = 76.0%) than the NIAS (adults = 45.8%; parents/guardians = 64.0%). Most PARDI-AR-Q dimensions and all NIAS dimensions were significant predictors of their corresponding PARDI dimensions in both groups.
DISCUSSION: The PARDI-AR-Q more accurately identified adults and children with ARFID, whereas the NIAS was a better estimator of ARFID symptoms. These findings provide partial support for using these self- and parent/guardian-report screeners. Results highlight the need to better understand diagnostic presentations of ARFID within community samples, particularly in adults, and to refine these tools within those populations.
METHOD: Fifty participants (divided into two groups: 25 adults and 25 parents/guardians of children) were selected from the ARFID Genes and Environment study, which enrolled over 3000 adults and parents/guardians of children who screened positive for ARFID on either the Pica, ARFID, and Rumination Disorder Interview-ARFID Questionnaire (PARDI-AR-Q) or the Nine Item ARFID Screen (NIAS) self- and parent/guardian-report measures. Participants then completed the ARFID portion of the Pica, ARFID, and Rumination Disorder Interview (PARDI) to determine ARFID diagnosis.
RESULTS: Correlations between the PARDI-AR-Q and PARDI (r = 0.31-0.67) were weaker than the correlations between the NIAS and PARDI (r = 0.53-0.64) in both groups. The diagnostic positive predictive value for the PARDI-AR-Q was numerically higher (adults = 55.0%; parents/guardians = 76.0%) than the NIAS (adults = 45.8%; parents/guardians = 64.0%). Most PARDI-AR-Q dimensions and all NIAS dimensions were significant predictors of their corresponding PARDI dimensions in both groups.
DISCUSSION: The PARDI-AR-Q more accurately identified adults and children with ARFID, whereas the NIAS was a better estimator of ARFID symptoms. These findings provide partial support for using these self- and parent/guardian-report screeners. Results highlight the need to better understand diagnostic presentations of ARFID within community samples, particularly in adults, and to refine these tools within those populations.