Balancing Objective Markers and Subjective Experience in Eating Disorder Diagnoses: Commentary on Dang et al. (2024)

The results of Dang et al.'s recent systematic review and meta-analysis suggested that individuals diagnosed with other specified feeding or eating disorder (OSFED) and those diagnosed with specified eating disorders (EDs, such as bulimia nervosa) endorse similar, elevated levels of ED-related cognitions (but not behaviors). The DSM has traditionally conceptualized EDs primarily as disturbances in eating behavior, and the diagnostic boundaries for EDs are based on objective markers, such as behavioral frequencies and weight. Although focusing on objective markers for ED diagnoses and severity indices has advantages (e.g., clinical communication, measurement), pitfalls include diagnostic migration and low emphasis on ED cognitions. Dang et al.'s findings provide a basis for rethinking DSM's conceptualization of EDs as primarily behavioral. This commentary discusses the potential merits and challenges of emphasizing subjective cognitions when assigning ED diagnoses. We explore how objective markers (e.g., behavioral frequency, weight) and subjective experience (e.g., fear of weight gain) may be balanced to improve the clinical utility of ED diagnoses. In all, research that more deeply phenotypes the subjective experiences of people with EDs across contexts, identities, and cultures will enrich our understanding of eating pathology and may inform diagnostic revisions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Eating Disorders
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.24268
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Eating Disorders and Behaviors
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.64

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Balancing Objective Markers and Subjective Experience in Eating Disorder Diagnoses: Commentary on Dang et al. (2024)

Kara Alise Christensen, Kelsey E. Hagan
1 citations
International Journal of Eating Disorders
Eating Disorders and Behaviors
0.64
article

Balancing Objective Markers and Subjective Experience in Eating Disorder Diagnoses: Commentary on Dang et al. (2024)

Kara Alise Christensen, Kelsey E. Hagan
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The results of Dang et al.'s recent systematic review and meta-analysis suggested that individuals diagnosed with other specified feeding or eating disorder (OSFED) and those diagnosed with specified eating disorders (EDs, such as bulimia nervosa) endorse similar, elevated levels of ED-related cognitions (but not behaviors). The DSM has traditionally conceptualized EDs primarily as disturbances in eating behavior, and the diagnostic boundaries for EDs are based on objective markers, such as behavioral frequencies and weight. Although focusing on objective markers for ED diagnoses and severity indices has advantages (e.g., clinical communication, measurement), pitfalls include diagnostic migration and low emphasis on ED cognitions. Dang et al.'s findings provide a basis for rethinking DSM's conceptualization of EDs as primarily behavioral. This commentary discusses the potential merits and challenges of emphasizing subjective cognitions when assigning ED diagnoses. We explore how objective markers (e.g., behavioral frequency, weight) and subjective experience (e.g., fear of weight gain) may be balanced to improve the clinical utility of ED diagnoses. In all, research that more deeply phenotypes the subjective experiences of people with EDs across contexts, identities, and cultures will enrich our understanding of eating pathology and may inform diagnostic revisions.

International Journal of Eating DisordersVol. 57(10)
University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US), Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
National Institutes of Health
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Eating Disorders and Behaviors
0.64
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.