暴饮暴食的量重要吗？
Does the size of a binge matter?
作者信息
Pratt E M, Niego S H, Agras W S
机构信息
Department of Psychology, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA.
出版信息
Int J Eat Disord. 1998 Nov;24(3):307-12. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1098-108x(199811)24:3<307::aid-eat8>3.0.co;2-q.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to examine whether objective and subjective binges differ significantly from each other in relation to measures of psychopathology in a sample of women who meet DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for bulimia nervosa.
METHOD
Baseline data from the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) were analyzed and the average of the sum of and the difference between objective and subjective binge episodes were converted to z scores. Regressions were run with other baseline measures including the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnosis of DSM-III-R (SCID) I and II disorders, EDE subscales, and psychological measures.
RESULTS
We found no significant difference between the two types of binges on all but one measure, the "Can Do" subscale of the Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, in a regression with the z score of total binges.
DISCUSSION
The lack of significant findings questions the diagnostic validity of the "large amount of food" criterion used to define binge eating in the DSM-IV.
目的
本研究旨在探讨在符合神经性贪食症DSM-IV诊断标准的女性样本中，客观暴饮暴食和主观暴饮暴食在心理病理学测量方面是否存在显著差异。
方法
对饮食失调检查（EDE）的基线数据进行分析，将客观和主观暴饮暴食发作次数之和与差值的平均值转换为z分数。采用其他基线测量进行回归分析，包括用于诊断DSM-III-R（SCID）I型和II型障碍的结构化临床访谈、EDE分量表以及心理测量。
结果
在对总暴饮暴食z分数进行回归分析时，除一项测量指标（自我效能量表的“能做到”分量表）外，我们发现两种类型的暴饮暴食之间没有显著差异。
讨论
缺乏显著结果对DSM-IV中用于定义暴饮暴食的“大量食物”标准的诊断有效性提出了质疑。
Zotero 插件