Binge Eating in Interview Versus Self‐Report: Different Diagnoses Show Different Divergences

Abstract

The findings have important clinical and theoretical implications and suggest that BE assessment is more complex than previously believed.

Acute symptoms associated with chemical exposures and safe work practices among hospital and campus cleaning workers: A pilot study

“…This finding is different from other studies [Rhodes et al, 1995;Steketee et al, 1996], which observed greater reporting of urinary symptoms or obsessive compulsive symptoms in self-administered methods than in interviews. In another study of binge eating, the two methods showed the opposite direction in reporting depending on the subjects' diagnosis [Birgegård et al, 2014]. Further evaluation is needed identify the impact of the methods on our study findings.…”

Transitioning from DSM‐IV to DSM‐5: A systematic review of eating disorder prevalence assessment

“…Furthermore, Pel aez-Fern andez et al 9 compared two different designs (single-stage versus two-stage) to assess the prevalence of ED among 559 males and females (14-18 years). 104 Nonetheless, self-report assessments are limited by their inability to determine formal ED diagnoses, and in clarifying complicated terms such as overeating. Although only trending towards statistical significance (P 5 0.06), these results highlight the likelihood of attaining higher prevalence rates using self-reports compared to two-stage approaches, and are in line with the existing literature.…”

Negative Affect Mediates the Relationship Between Interpersonal Problems and Binge‐Eating Disorder Symptoms and Psychopathology in a Clinical Sample: A Test of the Interpersonal Model

“…Such replications are important in psychological research to identify reliable findings (Koole & Lakens, 2012) and to generalize to clinical populations. Studies show that interview methods are a more reliable means of assessing eating disorder pathology (Birgegård, Norring, & Clinton, 2014). More commonly, studies with clinical samples tend to suffer from small sample sizes, which limit the reliability of conclusions.…”