Psychiatric comorbidity and severity in anorexia nervosa: a comparative study of the DSM-5, the ICD-11, and overvaluation of Weight/Shape severity ratings.

This study assessed the rate of a.) the total and b.) specific psychiatric comorbidities among the three severity ratings for Anorexia Nervosa (AN): DSM-5, ICD-11 and overvaluation of weight and shape (OWS). The sample comprised 312 treatment-seeking patients with AN (mean age = 26.9). Weight and height were taken at intake to calculate BMI, the foundation for the DSM-5 and ICD-11 severity indices. The EDE-Q was used to assess OWS, and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview was conducted to assess psychiatric comorbidities. For the DSM-5, the mild severity group showed a higher total number of psychiatric comorbidities, especially for panic, social anxiety, generalised anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorders compared to the severe and extremely severe groups. ICD-11 and OWS severity groups did not significantly differ in total comorbidities, except for major depressive disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorders being more prevalent in the "significantly low BMI" ICD-11 group. The high OWS group displayed a notably higher rate of major depressive disorder than the low OWS group. The study underscores inconsistent patterns across the three severity systems, emphasising the need to recognise the current limitations of the assessed severity classification systems in AN assessment and guiding treatment.

There is nothing as inconsistent as the OSFED diagnostic criteria.

Atypical anorexia nervosa (AAN), purging disorder (PD), night eating syndrome (NES), and subthreshold bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder (Sub-BN/BED) are the five categories that comprise the 'Other Specified Feeding or Eating Disorder' (OSFED) category in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM-5). In this review, we examine problems with the diagnostic criteria that are currently proposed for the five OSFED types. We conclude that the existing diagnostic criteria for OSFED are deficient and fall short of accurately describing the complexity and individuality of those with these eating disorders (EDs). Therefore, to enhance the quality of life of people with OSFED, diagnostic criteria for the condition should be applied uniformly in clinical and research settings.

Do risk factors differentiate DSM-5 and drive for thinness severity groups for anorexia nervosa?

BACKGROUND: The current study examined whether risk factors for anorexia nervosa (AN) were related to different levels of severity based on (a) the DSM-5/body mass index (BMI) and (b) drive for thinness (DT) severity ratings. METHODS: The sample comprised 153 pairs of individuals with a lifetime diagnosis AN per DSM-IV criteria and their non-ED sisters (N = 306, mean age = 26.53; mean current BMI = 20.42 kg/m2). The Oxford risk factor interview was used to establish AN-related risk factors. Individuals were categorised into the DSM-5 severity groups based on their lowest BMI, while the DT subscale from the eating disorder inventory-2 was used to classify individuals with AN into low and high DT groups. RESULTS: Multinominal regression models showed similar risk factors (e.g., perfectionism, having a history of being teased about weight and shape) contributed to the development of AN using the DSM-5 and DT severity ratings. Follow-up analyses across the severity groups for both indices revealed that only childhood perfectionism was found to be more common in the extreme severe DSM-5 BMI severity group compared to the severe DSM-5 group. CONCLUSION: Overall, this study found little evidence for AN risk factors being related to the DSM-5 and DT severity ratings. However, given the novelty of this study, replication of the current results is warranted.

Several risk factors, such as childhood obesity, have been found to contribute to the development of Anorexia Nervosa (AN). Yet, we are unsure if there is a set of risk factors that influence different levels of AN severity. While the DSM-5 suggests using BMI to measure severity, recent support favour the usage of drive for thinness (DT) as an alternative severity measure. Therefore, this study aimed to explore risk factors specifically associated with the development of different AN severity levels using both the DSM-5 BMI and DT severity classification systems. We recruited 153 pairs of individuals with a lifetime diagnosis AN per DSM-IV criteria and their non-ED sisters. The Oxford risk factor interview was used to establish AN-related risk factors. We found childhood perfectionism, weight/shape teasing, childhood obesity, and breast-related embarrassment to be significant risk factors for AN. Additionally, childhood perfectionism was more common in the extreme severe DSM-5 group compared to the severe DSM-5 group. This suggests that adding perfectionism-related aspects to prevention and early intervention programs for AN may be beneficial. Considering the novelty of this study, replication of the current results is needed.

How to assess eating disorder severity in males?The DSM-5 severity index versus severity based on drive for thinness.

Using a male eating disorder (ED) sample, this study assessed the clinical utility of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 (DSM-5) severity indices for males with anorexia nervosa (AN) and bulimia nervosa (BN) and compared it to an alternative transdiagnostic severity categorisation based on drive for thinness (DT). The participants included 143 males with an ED (60 [42.0%] AN and 83 [58.0%] BN) diagnosis, who were classified using these two severity classifications. The different severity categories were then compared based on ED symptoms, general psychopathology, and personality traits. Our results revealed that the DSM-5 "mild" and DT "low" severity categories were most prevalent in the AN and BN male patients. Clinically significant findings were strongest for the DT categorisation for both AN and BN. The current findings provide initial support for an alternative transdiagnostic DT severity classification for males that may be more clinically meaningful than the DSM-5 severity indices.

Assessing severity in anorexia nervosa: Do the DSM-5 and an alternative severity rating based on overvaluation of weight and shape severity differ in psychological and biological correlates?

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the severity ratings for anorexia nervosa (AN) in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and an alternative severity rating based on overvaluation of weight/shape, on a range of psychological and biological variables. METHOD: A sample of 312 treatment-seeking patients with AN (mean age = 25.3, SD = 7.6; mean BMI = 16.8 kg/m2 , SD = 2.4) were categorised using both DSM-5 severity levels (mild/moderate/severe/extreme) and weight/shape (low/high) overvaluation. The severity categories were compared on a range of psychological (e.g., eating psychopathology) and biological (e.g., sodium) variables. RESULTS: Results showed that the overvaluation of weight/shape appeared better at indexing the level of severity in psychological variables among patients with AN compared to the DSM-5 severity rating with moderate to large effect sizes. Moreover, the DSM-5 mild and moderate severity groups experienced significantly higher eating and general psychopathology than the severe and extreme groups. Finally, neither the DSM-5 nor the weight/shape severity groups differed on any of the biological variables. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided no support for the DSM-5 severity rating for AN, while initial support was found for the weight/shape overvaluation approach in indexing psychological but not biological correlates.

A new integrative model for the co-occurrence of non-suicidal self-injury behaviours and eating disorder symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: The high co-occurrence of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) behaviours and eating disorder (ED) symptoms suggests these conditions share common aetiological processes. We assessed a new integrative model of shared factors for NSSI and ED symptoms, where affect dysregulation, impulsivity, self-esteem, and body dissatisfaction mediated the relationship between insecure attachment and maladaptive schemas and NSSI and ED symptoms. A further aim of the study was to assess whether the model behaved similarly across a clinical eating disorder (ED) and a community sample. METHOD: 123 females with a lifetime ED diagnosis and 531 female individuals from the community completed an online survey, which included measures assessing the variables of interest. A cross-sectional single time point analysis was used. RESULTS: Invariance testing indicated that the model was structurally non-invariant (different across groups). The proposed integrative model was a good fit for the ED group, but for the community sample only a revised model reached an acceptable fit. Both attachment and maladaptive schemas, included early in the model, were implicated in the pathways leading to ED and NSSI symptoms in the ED and community groups. In the community group, impulsivity, a mediator, was a shared predictor for NSSI and bulimic symptoms. No other mediating variables were shared by NSSI and ED symptoms in the two groups. Overall, the proposed model explained slightly more variance for the ED group relative to the community group in drive for thinness (R2 = .57 vs .51) and NSSI (R2 = .29 vs .24) but less variance in bulimic symptoms (R2 = .33 vs .39). CONCLUSION: We conclude that the current model provides only limited support for explaining the comorbidity between NSSI and ED symptoms. It is vital to consider both common (e.g., attachment and maladaptive schemas) and specific factors (e.g., impulsivity) to better understand the pathways that lead to the co-occurrence of NSSI and ED symptoms. A new integrative model assessed whether emotion dysregulation, impulsivity, self-esteem, and body dissatisfaction were mediators in the relationship between insecure attachment and maladaptive beliefs about the world and the self and subsequent eating disorder and self-harm symptoms. A further aim was to assess whether the proposed model differed between a clinical eating disorder and a community sample. All participants were female and included 123 patients with a lifetime eating disorder and 531 individuals from the community. Participating individuals completed an online survey at one timepoint, which included measures assessing the variables of interest. The findings of the current study indicated that the proposed model was a good match for the clinical eating disorder sample, but for the community sample only a revised model yielded acceptable statistical fit. Both insecure attachment and maladaptive beliefs about the world and the self, included early in the model, were indirectly related to eating disorder and self-harm symptoms for both the eating disorder and the community groups. Impulsivity, a mediator, was the only shared predictor for self-harm, and bulimic symptoms in the community group. We conclude that the current model provides only limited support for explaining the comorbidity between self-harming behaviours and disordered eating symptoms.

Night Eating Syndrome in Patients With Obesity and Binge Eating Disorder: A Systematic Review.

Night eating syndrome (NES) is currently classified as an Other Specified Feeding or Eating Disorder (OSFED) under the Diagnostic Statistical Manual-5 (DSM-5). This systematic review aims to consolidate the studies that describe the sociodemographic, clinical and psychological features of NES in a population of patients with eating disorders (ED), obesity, or those undergoing bariatric surgery, and were published after the publication of the DSM-5. A further aim was to compare, where possible, NES with BED on the aforementioned variables. Lastly, we aimed to appraise the quality of the studies being included in the review. We conducted a systematic search on three databases (MEDLINE, PubMed and Embase) which resulted in the selection of 22 studies for the review. We included the articles that studied patients with NES and their sociodemographic, clinical and psychological features in a clinical (i.e., ED, obese or bariatric surgery) population, through a quantitative study design. Articles were excluded if the NES patients included in the study had a comorbid psychological disorder, and/or the sample was collected from a university/non-clinical population, and/or the study design was qualitative, and/or NES features were compared with any other disorder, except BED. Our study found that no conclusions about the link between any sociodemographic feature (such as, age, gender, income, etc.) and an NES diagnosis could be made. Further, NES patients presented with elevated ED pathology (including emotional eating and loss of control eating) and higher occurrence of depressive symptoms than controls. Contrary to the literature suggesting that NES and Binge Eating Disorder (BED; an ED subtype which is also comorbid with obesity) patients often report overlapping features, questioning the validity of NES as an ED diagnosis, we found that BED can be differentiated from NES by the higher occurrence of emotional eating, body related concerns and abnormal eating episodes. The review also suggested an overlap between NES and Sleep-Related Eating Disorder. We recommend that it is essential to study NES as an independent disorder to further develop its diagnostic criteria and treatment options, thereby, increasing the quality of life of the patients suffering from this syndrome.