Cited by 527Eating Disorders and BehaviorsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

The measurement of impairment due to eating disorder psychopathology

Open access
Bohn, Kristin, Doll, Helen A., Cooper, Zafra, O'Connor, Marianne, Palmer, Robert L., Fairburn, Christopher G.·2008·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

Eating disorders have a profound and highly specific impact on psychosocial functioning. The aim of this research was to develop a measure of such secondary impairment. A 16-item, self-report instrument was developed, the Clinical Impairment Assessment (CIA), which was designed to measure such impairment overall and in three specific domains (personal, cognitive, social). The psychometric properties of the instrument were evaluated using data collected in the context of a transdiagnostic treatment trial. The findings consistently supported the utility of the instrument with the CIA being shown to have high levels of internal consistency, construct and discriminant validity, test-retest reliability, and sensitivity to change. The CIA should be of value to clinicians when assessing patients with eating disorders and their response to treatment. It should also help inform epidemiological research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2008.06.012

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bohn, K., Doll, H. A., Cooper, Z., O'Connor, M., Palmer, R. L., & Fairburn, C. G.
Affiliations
  • Warneford Hospital (GB)
  • Leicester General Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Bohn, Kristin
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-10
Volume
46
Issue
10
Pages
1105-1110
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2049931513
Cited by
527
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 9
FWCI
10.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (046386, 079113, 079113/Z/06/Z)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
eating disorders, psychosocial impairment, self-report instrument development, psychometric validation, transdiagnostic treatment, treatment response assessment, social functioning, cognitive function, personal functioning
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Anorexia Nervosa, Bulimia, Humans, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Assessment, Sensitivity and Specificity, Sickness Impact Profile

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review