↓ Skip to main content

Adult picky eaters with symptoms of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder: comparable distress and comorbidity but different eating behaviors compared to those with disordered eating symptoms

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Eating Disorders, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Adult picky eaters with symptoms of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder: comparable distress and comorbidity but different eating behaviors compared to those with disordered eating symptoms
Published in
Journal of Eating Disorders, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40337-016-0110-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hana F. Zickgraf, Martin E. Franklin, Paul Rozin

Abstract

One presentation of Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID) is characterized by picky eating, i.e., selective eating based on the sensory properties of food. The present study has two aims. The first is to describe distress and impairment in individuals with ARFID secondary to picky eating. The second is to determine whether eating behaviors hypothesized to be specific to picky eating can differentiate picky eaters with and without ARFID from typical eaters (e.g., individuals not reporting picky or disordered eating) and individuals who strongly endorse attitudes associated with anorexia and bulimia (eating disordered attitudes). Participants were recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk (N = 325) and an online support group for adult picky eaters (N = 81). Participants were grouped based on endorsement of picky eating, ARFID symptoms, and elevated eating disordered attitudes on the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-26). The resulting four eating behavior groups were compared on measures of distress and impairment (e.g., anxiety/depression and, obsessive compulsive disorder symptoms, eating-related quality of life) and on measures of eating behaviors associated with picky eating (e.g., food neophobia, inflexibility about preparation and presentation of preferred foods, sensitivity to sensory stimuli, and eating from a very narrow range of foods). The groups were compared using one way ANOVA with post-hoc Tamhane's T2 tests. On measures of distress and impairment, participants with ARFID reported higher scores than both typical eaters and picky eaters without ARFID, and comparable scores to those with disordered eating attitudes. Three of four measures of picky eating behavior, eating inflexibility, food neophobia, and eating from a range of 20 or fewer foods, distinguished picky eaters with and without ARFID form typical eaters and those with disordered eating attitudes. Picky eaters with ARFID reported greater food neophobia and eating inflexibility, and were more likely to eat from a narrow range of foods, compared to picky eaters without ARFID. Adult picky eaters can be differentiated from those with symptoms of anorexia and bulimia by their stronger endorsement of food neophobia and inflexible eating behaviors, and by eating from a very narrow range of foods. Picky eaters with ARFID symptoms can be differentiated from picky eaters without these symptoms on the basis of these three eating behaviors, and by their higher endorsement of internalizing distress, OCD symptoms, and eating-related quality of life impairment. This study provides evidence that ARFID symptoms exist independently of symptoms of other eating disorders and are characterized by several distinct eating behaviors. In a clinical analogue sample of disordered eaters, ARFID symptoms were associated with distress and impairment at levels comparable to symptoms of anorexia and bulimia.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 25%
Student > Master 13 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 4 6%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 12 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 17 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,934,312
of 14,687,926 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Eating Disorders
#244
of 362 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,030
of 289,700 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Eating Disorders
#23
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,687,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 362 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.1. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 289,700 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.