A comparison of the binge eating scale, questionnaire for eating and weight patterns-revised, and eating disorder examination questionnaire with instructions with the eating disorder examination in the assessment of binge eating disorder and its symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: The current study assesses concordance between self-administered measures and a diagnostic standard for assessment of binge frequency and diagnosis of binge eating disorder (BED) in a sample of binge eaters. METHOD: The Questionnaire for Eating and Weight Patterns-Revised (QEWP-R), Binge Eating Scale (BES), two items from the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire with Instructions (EDE-Q-I), and the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) were administered. Participants were 157 adults volunteering for a clinical study, of whom 129 (79%) were diagnosed with BED using the EDE as the diagnostic standard. RESULTS: In the identification of BED, the QEWP-R yielded a sensitivity value of .74 and a specificity value of .35. The BES yielded a sensitivity value of .85 and a specificity value of .20. Frequency of binge eating days and episodes on the EDE-Q-I correlated highly with the EDE (.65 and .48, respectively; p < .001). DISCUSSION: The accuracy of diagnosis and symptomatology among self-administered questionnaires is variable. The BES and the QEWP-R performed satisfactorily as initial screens for the diagnosis of BED, but were less accurate in identifying non-BED individuals and the frequency of binge eating. The EDE-Q-I most accurately assessed the frequency of binge eating.

Ecologic momentary assessment of eating-disordered behaviors.

OBJECTIVE: This pilot study evaluated the feasibility of ecologic momentary assessment (EMA) to measure five eating disorder behaviors and to examine reactivity of these behaviors to this measurement approach. The pattern of correspondence between EMA and the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) was also examined. METHODS: Women with threshold or subthreshold anorexia and bulimia nervosa (N=16) recorded their eating disorder behaviors for 4 weeks on a hand-held computer. Upon completion of the EMA procedure, the EDE was administered. RESULTS: Eighty-eight percent of the sample completed the EMA behavioral recording. No differences in behavioral frequency were found in the first and second halves of the EMA measurement period, suggesting that behaviors were not reactive to the methodology. Binging and excessive exercise were lower when measured by EMA compared with the EDE. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that EMA is a feasible and valid approach to the measurement of disordered eating behaviors.

Assessment of bulimia nervosa: a comparison of interview and self-report questionnaire methods.

OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to assess the level of agreement between the Eating Disorders Examination (EDE) and its self-report version (EDE-Q) on key items in a clinic sample of patients with bulimia nervosa. A second objective was to assess the concordance between self-reported and objective body weight in the sample. METHOD: Sixty females who met DSM-IV criteria for bulimia nervosa (purging type) participated. Fifty-seven of them completed both the EDE and the EDE-Q. Self-reported weight was obtained during a telephone screening interview. Objective weight was subsequently measured at an assessment about a week later. RESULTS: The EDE generated higher scores than the EDE-Q for the frequency of objective binge and vomiting episodes. The two methods produced equivalent results for subjective binge episodes, laxative and diuretic misuse, and concerns about shape and weight. The self-report method underestimated body weight. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that some core features of eating disorders are more accurately assessed using the EDE interview.

Criterion validity of the multiaxial assessment of eating disorders symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to establish the criterion validity of the Multiaxial Assessment of Eating Disorders Symptoms (MAEDS). The MAEDS is a brief, comprehensive, self-report measure for the evaluation of eating disorders treatment outcome. It assesses six symptoms associated with eating disorders with subscales for binge eating, purgative behavior, avoidance of forbidden foods, restrictive eating, fear of fatness, and depression. METHOD: To establish criterion validity, we compared the subscale scores of the MAEDS across four eating disorder diagnoses, specified by subtype (bulimia nervosa, purging type; anorexia nervosa, binge-eating/purging type; anorexia nervosa, restricting type; and binge eating disorder). Participants who did not meet the full diagnostic criteria for an eating disorder, but who did meet criteria for a partial syndrome eating disorder, were grouped with the full eating disorder diagnostic subtypes. RESULTS: The criterion validity of the MAEDS was supported by the pattern of subscale scores for the different eating disorder diagnostic groups. Also, with few exceptions, persons diagnosed with anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and binge eating disorder, in comparison to subthreshold cases of anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and binge eating disorder, had equivalent scores on the subscales of the MAEDS. DISCUSSION: These findings support the criterion validity of the MAEDS and add to a growing literature that questions differences in severity of eating disorder symptoms in full syndrome versus partial syndrome cases.

Functional assessment and binge eating. A review of the literature and suggestions for future research.

This article briefly discusses the process of conducting a functional assessment of a problem behavior. Current research on the assessment of antecedents and consequences of binge eating behavior is then reviewed. The article concludes with suggestions for future research in the functional assessment and classification of binge eating.