Additionally, the authors report the following financial disclosures: Dr. Berg, none; Ms. Stiles-Shields, none; Ms. Swanson, none; Dr. Peterson, royalties from Guilford Press; Ms. Lebow, none; Dr. Le Grange, royalties from Guilford Press and honoraria from the Training Institute for Child and Adolescent Eating Disorders, LLC.
Topical Section: Scale and Questionnaire Development CE Activity
Diagnostic concordance of the interview and questionnaire versions of the eating disorder examination†
Version of Record online: 8 AUG 2011
Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
International Journal of Eating Disorders
Volume 45, Issue 7, pages 850–855, November 2012
How to Cite
Berg, K. C., Stiles-Shields, E. C., Swanson, S. A., Peterson, C. B., Lebow, J. and Le Grange, D. (2012), Diagnostic concordance of the interview and questionnaire versions of the eating disorder examination. Int. J. Eat. Disord., 45: 850–855. doi: 10.1002/eat.20948
- Issue online: 17 OCT 2012
- Version of Record online: 8 AUG 2011
- Manuscript Accepted: 28 MAY 2011
- NIMH. Grant Number: T32 MH082761-01
- eating disorder examination;
- eating disorder examination-questionnaire;
- eating disorders;
- diagnostic concordance;
The diagnostic concordance of the interview (EDE) and questionnaire (EDE-Q) versions of the Eating Disorder Examination was examined.
Two-hundred seventeen patients seeking eating disorder treatment completed the EDE and EDE-Q before beginning treatment. Diagnostic algorithms were generated for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition, text revision (DSM-IV-TR) and proposed Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria using data first from the EDE and then from the EDE-Q; thus, each participant received four diagnoses.
The sensitivity of the EDE-Q for individual diagnoses ranged from 27.8% to 84.3% (DSM-IV-TR) and from 36.8% to 80.8% (DSM-5). The specificity of the EDE-Q for individual diagnoses ranged from 71.1% to 98.5% (DSM-IV-TR) and from 77.3% to 98.0% (DSM-5). The overall diagnostic concordance was moderate (κ = .57–.60).
The proposed DSM-5 criteria improved the diagnostic concordance of the two instruments and reduced the prevalence of Eating Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (EDNOS). However, concordance improvement was modest and both instruments still diagnosed most respondents with EDNOS. © 2011 by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (Int J Eat Disord 2011;45:850–855)