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

Other specified and unspecified feeding or eating disorders among women in the community

“…As previous studies have shown, [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] this effort was relatively successful: in our setting, the introduction of the DSM-5 substantially reduced the size of the residual group from 3.9% to 1.5%. As previous studies have shown, [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] this effort was relatively successful: in our setting, the introduction of the DSM-5 substantially reduced the size of the residual group from 3.9% to 1.5%.…”

“…[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] Because the residual categories of eating disorders remain sizeable in many settings, more information is needed about the subsyndromes to optimize treatments and to better understand the likely course of symptoms. In some settings, the catch-all diagnostic category has almost been eliminated, but in other settings, up to a half of patients presenting for treatment for eating disorders still receive a residual diagnosis.…”

Interview‐based assessment of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID): A pilot study evaluating an ARFID module for the Eating Disorder Examination

“…However, the lack of positive diagnostic criteria resulted in a considerable variety of diagnoses, nosological challenges, and made evidence‐based diagnostic and treatment options difficult to apply (Fairburn & Bohn, ; Thomas, Vartanian, & Brownell, ). Notably, this category accounted for more than half of the eating disorder diagnoses in childhood (Ornstein et al, ), adolescence, and young adulthood (Thomas et al, ). The recent inclusion of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) within the feeding and eating disorder section of the fifth revision of the DSM (DSM‐5; APA, ), though, was found to increase the diagnostic specificity of eating disorder classification in children (Ornstein et al, ).…”

Are eating disorders “all about control?” The elusive psychopathology of nonfat phobic presentations

“…Internal consistency of Restraint scale was high for both R‐shape/weight items (Cronbach's α = .79) and R‐control items (Cronbach's α = .87). Inter‐rater reliability for a convenience sample of 16 EDEs was adequate in the current sample (Thomas et al, ).…”