European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2007
Self-report versus interview assessment of purging in a community sample of women.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка 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.
Mond J M, Hay P J, Rodgers B, Owen C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: Agreement between self-report and interview assessment of purging behaviours was examined in a community sample of women with a high level of eating disorder symptoms (n = 324) who completed both the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) and Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q).
RESULTS: Of 46 individuals who reported any use of self-induced vomiting or laxative misuse on the questionnaire, 19 (41.7%) denied these behaviours when subsequently questioned in a face-to-face interview. These individuals had lower levels of eating disorder psychopathology, functional impairment and general psychological distress, than participants who reported purging on both the questionnaire and at interview (n = 27).
CONCLUSIONS: The assumption of interview superiority in the assessment of specific aspects of eating disorder psychopathology should not be uncritically accepted. Caution should be exercised in drawing conclusions concerning the level of agreement between self-report and interview assessment of purging based on research in clinical samples.
RESULTS: Of 46 individuals who reported any use of self-induced vomiting or laxative misuse on the questionnaire, 19 (41.7%) denied these behaviours when subsequently questioned in a face-to-face interview. These individuals had lower levels of eating disorder psychopathology, functional impairment and general psychological distress, than participants who reported purging on both the questionnaire and at interview (n = 27).
CONCLUSIONS: The assumption of interview superiority in the assessment of specific aspects of eating disorder psychopathology should not be uncritically accepted. Caution should be exercised in drawing conclusions concerning the level of agreement between self-report and interview assessment of purging based on research in clinical samples.