MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983218416 · doi:10.1002/eat.10050

Disordered eating and substance use in an epidemiological sample: I. associations within individuals

2002· article· en· W1983218416 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin M. von Ranson, William G. Iacono, Matt McGue

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Eating Disorders · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
KeywordsEating disordersSubstance useDisordered eatingSubstance dependenceAddictionEpidemiologyPsychologyClinical psychologyNicotinePsychiatryNicotine dependenceSubstance abuseMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the strength of associations between disordered eating and eating disorders and substance use and substance use disorders (SU/SUDs) in an epidemiological sample. METHODS: 672 adolescent girls and 718 women completed structured interviews of lifetime eating disorders and substance use and misuse, as well as self-reported current disordered eating attitudes and behaviors. RESULTS: Although effect sizes were small, eating attitudes and disorders were associated modestly with nicotine, alcohol, and drug use, and with nicotine dependence in adolescent girls. Alcohol use and misuse were related to eating attitudes and pathology in women. SU/SUDs were associated with restricting and bulimic behaviors and no prominent differences in associations were observed between substance classes. In contrast to findings in clinical populations, these community-based results were positive but generally weak, suggesting there is no strong, overarching relationship between eating and substance use problems. DISCUSSION: These results have implications for the addiction model of eating disorders.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations102
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Eating DisordersSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207