The impact of revised DSM-5 criteria on the relative distribution and inter-rater reliability of eating disorder diagnoses in a residential treatment setting.

ABSTRACT

This study evaluated the relative distribution and inter-rater reliability of revised DSM-5 criteria for eating disorders in a residential treatment program. Consecutive adolescent and young adult females (N=150) admitted to a residential eating disorder treatment facility were assigned both DSM-IV and DSM-5 diagnoses by a clinician (n=14) via routine clinical interview and a research assessor (n=4) via structured interview. We compared the frequency of diagnostic assignments under each taxonomy and by type of assessor. We evaluated concordance between clinician and researcher assignment through inter-rater reliability kappa and percent agreement. Significantly fewer patients received either clinician or researcher diagnoses of a residual eating disorder under DSM-5 (clinician-12.0%; researcher-31.3%) versus DSM-IV (clinician-28.7%; researcher-59.3%), with the majority of reassigned DSM-IV residual cases reclassified as DSM-5 anorexia nervosa. Researcher and clinician diagnoses showed moderate inter-rater reliability under DSM-IV (κ=.48) and DSM-5 (κ=.57), though agreement for specific DSM-5 other specified feeding or eating disorder (OSFED) presentations was poor (κ=.05). DSM-5 revisions were associated with significantly less frequent residual eating disorder diagnoses, but not with reduced inter-rater reliability. Findings support specific dimensions of clinical utility for revised DSM-5 criteria for eating disorders.