Personality dimensions among women with an eating disorder: Towards reconceptualizing DSM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incremental validity of a dimensional assessment of personality, after controlling for diagnostic category, in accounting for meaningful variation in eating disorder attitudes and behaviours and in current affective distress among a clinical sample of eating disordered women. METHODS: 244 treatment seeking eating disordered women and 116 non-eating disordered women were assessed with the NEO five factor inventory (NEO-FFI), and with measures of eating disorder attitudes and of affective distress using a cross sectional design. RESULTS: As predicted, differences were found between eating disordered and non-eating disordered women on several NEO-FFI scales, which provided a context for subsequent analyses. NEO-FFI scales accounted for meaningful variation in eating disordered attitudes and behaviours as well as in levels of current affective distress over and above DSM-IV diagnostic category. CONCLUSION: A flexible approach to diagnosis, which includes personality dimensions along with a description of eating disorder symptoms, may result in a more inclusive and useful diagnostic scheme for treating women with 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".