CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 134Eating Disorders and BehaviorsNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Further development of the 12-item EDE-QS: identifying a cut-off for screening purposes

Open access
Prnjak, Katarina, Mitchison, Deborah, Griffiths, Scott, Mond, Jonathan, Gideon, Nicole, Serpell, Lucy, Hay, Phillipa·2020·BMC Psychiatry
DOI 10.1186/s12888-020-02565-5PMC PMC7118929

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Eating Disorder Examination - Questionnaire Short (EDE-QS) was developed as a 12-item version of the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q) with a 4-point response scale that assesses eating disorder (ED) symptoms over the preceding 7 days. It has demonstrated good psychometric properties at initial testing. The purpose of this brief report is to determine a threshold score that could be used in screening for probable ED cases in community settings. METHODS: Data collected from Gideon et al. (2016) were re-analyzed. In their study, 559 participants (80.86% female; 9.66% self-reported ED diagnosis) completed the EDE-Q, EDE-QS, SCOFF, and Clinical Impairment Assessment (CIA). Discriminatory power was compared between ED instruments using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses. RESULTS: A score of 15 emerged as the threshold that ensured the best trade-off between sensitivity (.83) and specificity (.85), and good positive predictive value (.37) for the EDE-QS, with discriminatory power comparable to other ED instruments. CONCLUSION: The EDE-QS appears to be an instrument with good discriminatory power that could be used for ED screening purposes.

Overview

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 · 10.1186/s12888-020-02565-5

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Relationship between sensitivity and specificity at different cut-off scores. Black-colored markers indicate cut-off scores of 15, 2.8, and 2 for EDE-QS, EDE-Q, and SCOFF, respectively
Fig. 1 Relationship between sensitivity and specificity at different cut-off scores. Black-colored markers indicate cut-off scores of 15, 2.8, and 2 for EDE-QS, EDE-Q, and SCOFF, respectivelyCC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Fairburn CG, Cooper Z, O'Connor M. The eating disorder examination. Int J Eat Disord. 1993;6:1–8.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–134 of 134

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Prnjak, K., Mitchison, D., Griffiths, S., Mond, J., Gideon, N., Serpell, L., & Hay, P.
Affiliations
  • Western Sydney University (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • University of Tasmania (AU)
  • Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • North East London NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Camden and Campbelltown Hospitals (AU)
Corresponding author
Prnjak, Katarina
ORCID
Venue
BMC Psychiatry
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-04-03
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
146-146
ISSN
1471-244X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s12888-020-02565-5
PMC
PMC7118929
OpenAlex
W3014826794
Cited by
134
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 5
FWCI
5.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • BMC Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UTAS Research Repository (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Western Sydney University
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1121538)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire, eating disorders, screening, cut-off values, threshold scores, discriminant validity, sensitivity and specificity, SCOFF questionnaire, community settings
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Feeding and Eating Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Predictive Value of Tests, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results

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