Self‐report measures of loss of control over eating: Psychometric properties in clinical and non‐clinical samples

Bodell, Lindsay P.; Forney, K. Jean; Chavarria, Jesus; Keel, Pamela K.; Wildes, Jennifer E.

doi:10.1002/eat.22957

Cited by 12 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(48 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with previous research, the BED group had elevated levels of self-reported impulsivity relative to HC in both food-specific and general measures of impulsivity ( Meule, 2013 ; Bodell et al, 2018 ). This increase in more general impulsivity is particularly interesting as it suggests that individuals with BED may experience challenges with behaviours beyond eating.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Impulsivity and Its Relationship With Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate Treatment in Binge Eating Disorder

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High trait impulsivity is thought to contribute to the sense of loss of control over eating and impulses to binge eat experienced by those with binge eating disorder (BED). Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), a drug approved for treatment of moderate to severe BED, has been shown to decrease impulsive features of BED. However, the relationship between LDX-related reductions of binge eating (BE) episodes and impulsivity has not yet been explored. Forty-one adults aged 18–40years with moderate to severe BED completed questionnaires and tasks assessing impulsivity at baseline and after 8weeks of 50–70mg of LDX. Twenty age-matched healthy controls were also assessed at two timepoints for normative comparison. Data were analysed using linear mixed models. BED participants exhibited increased self-reported motor, non-planning, cognitive and food-related impulsivity relative to controls but no differences in objective task-based measures of impulsivity. Food-related and non-planning impulsivity was significantly reduced by LDX, but not to normative levels. Individuals with higher baseline levels of motor and non-planning impulsivity, and loss of control over eating scores experienced the greatest reduction in BE frequency after 8weeks of LDX. Further, there were significant associations between the degree to which subjective loss of control over eating, non-planning impulsivity and BE frequency reduced after 8weeks of LDX. These data suggest that specific subjective measures of impulsivity may be able to predict who will have the greatest benefit from LDX treatment and that reductions in BE frequency may be moderated by concurrent reductions in non-planning impulsivity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Impulsivity and Its Relationship With Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate Treatment in Binge Eating Disorder

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, only 18.4% of the sample reported dietary restraint due to weight/shape concerns. Mean global EDE-Q scores for the sample were below clinical cutoffs (Mond et al, 2004;Schaefer et al, 2018), yet LOCES scores were consistent with published means from nonclinical samples (Bodell et al, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Motivation for dietary restraint, and disordered eating among adults experiencing food insecurity in the United States

Gomez

Perez

2022

Intl J Eating Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Does engaging in dietary restraint due to weight/shape concerns versus economic hardship differentially relate to disordered eating? Method The sample consisted of 582 adults experiencing food insecurity (FI) who completed online measures assessing severity of FI, disordered eating, loss of control over eating, and dietary restraint. Participants reported their motivation for dietary restraint with options consisting of weight/shape concerns, economic hardship (i.e., insufficient funds and prioritizing others' needs), mixed reasons, and other/I do not know. Results In the sample, 18% reported engaging in dietary restraint primarily due to weight/shape concerns, 33% due to economic hardship, 18% other/do not know, and 30% due to a mix of reasons. There were positive correlations between FI, economic hardship, dietary restraint, disordered eating, and loss of control over eating. Regression analyses revealed the association between dietary restraint and disordered eating does not differ across individuals who endorse economic hardship as a motivator for dietary restraint. Findings replicated with loss of control. However, the association between dietary restraint and disordered eating grew stronger as more dietary restraint due to weight/shape concerns was endorsed. No significant association emerged with loss of control. Discussion Research is needed to replicate findings and examine how patterns of food scarcity impacts disordered eating in food insecure populations with and without weight/shape concerns. Findings suggest that motivation for dietary restraint may influence associations with dietary restraint and the cognitive components of disordered eating, but not the behavioral components of disordered eating. Public Significance Statement Disordered eating due to dietary restraint is most commonly associated with weight and shape concerns; however, even when dietary restraint is due to economic reasons, it can still be associated with disordered eating.

show abstract

“…Of note, previous studies have suggested that subjective binge episodes are clinically meaningful, but have low reliability [ 25 – 27 ]. Improved diagnostic guidelines, assessment tool instructions, and new measures (e.g., the Eating Loss of Control Scale and the Loss of Control over Eating Scale) may help increase reliability and improve diagnosis and severity assessment across disorders characterized by binge eating [ 10 , 11 , 28 , 29 ]. Our findings could help inform the refinement of these assessment tools to measure LOC.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our findings could help inform the refinement of these assessment tools to measure LOC. For example, although eating disorder experts who contributed to the development of the Loss of Control over Eating Scale (LOCES [ 11 ];) highly rated items describing mindless eating as “covering or reflecting” LOC, these mindless eating items had lower corrected item-total correlations [ 11 ], and one study found that the LOCES-Brief, which excludes these mindless eating items, provided a better fit to data from both clinical and non-clinical samples [ 28 ]. The current results more explicitly suggest that conflation of mindless and LOC eating may be a common cause of binge eating misdiagnosis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient descriptions of loss of control and eating episode size interact to influence expert diagnosis of ICD-11 binge-eating disorder

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Although data suggest that the sense of “loss of control” (LOC) is the most salient aspect of binge eating, the definition of LOC varies widely across eating disorder assessments. The WHO ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for binge eating do not require an objectively large amount of food, which makes accurate LOC diagnosis even more critical. However, it can be especially challenging to assess LOC in the context of elevated weight status and in the absence of compensatory behaviors. This ICD-11 field sub-study examined how descriptions of subjective experience during distressing eating episodes, in combination with different eating episode sizes, influence diagnoses of binge-eating disorder (BED). Method Mental health professionals with eating disorder expertise from WHO’s Global Clinical Practice Network (N = 192) participated in English, Japanese, and Spanish. Participants were asked to select the correct diagnosis for two randomly assigned case vignettes and to rate the clinical importance and ease of use of each BED diagnostic guideline. Results The presence of LOC interacted with episode size to predict whether a correct diagnostic conclusion was reached. If the amount consumed during a typical distressing eating episode was only subjectively large compared to objectively large, clinicians were 23.1 times more likely to miss BED than to correctly diagnose it, and they were 9.7 times more likely to incorrectly diagnose something else than to correctly diagnose BED. In addition, clinicians were 10.8 times more likely to make a false positive diagnosis of BED when no LOC was described if the episode was objectively large. Descriptions of LOC that were reliably associated with correct diagnoses across episodes sizes included two that are similar to those already included in proposed ICD-11 guidelines and a third that is not. This third description of LOC focuses on giving up attempts to control eating because perceived overeating feels inevitable. Conclusions Results highlight the importance of detailed clarification of the LOC construct in future guidelines. Explicitly distinguishing LOC from distressing and mindless overeating could help promote consistent and accurate diagnosis of BED versus another or no eating disorder.

show abstract

Self‐report measures of loss of control over eating: Psychometric properties in clinical and non‐clinical samples

Cited by 12 publications

References 25 publications

Impulsivity and Its Relationship With Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate Treatment in Binge Eating Disorder

Impulsivity and Its Relationship With Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate Treatment in Binge Eating Disorder

Motivation for dietary restraint, and disordered eating among adults experiencing food insecurity in the United States

Patient descriptions of loss of control and eating episode size interact to influence expert diagnosis of ICD-11 binge-eating disorder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About