Eating disorder not otherwise specified: The view from a tertiary care treatment center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to characterize a large number of adult outpatients diagnosed with eating disorder not otherwise specified (EDNOS). METHOD: The sample consisted of 1,449 patients who were classified as anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), or assigned to one of six EDNOS categories. Eating disorder groups were compared on demographic features, symptom frequencies, and psychological functioning. RESULTS: Forty percent of the sample was categorized as EDNOS. A subgroup of purging only patients closely resembled the BN purging subtype. Although EDNOS subthreshold BN patients reported less psychopathology than full syndrome BN they, nevertheless, displayed clinical levels of disturbance. Patients who binge-eat once a week demonstrate a profile of psychological functioning similar to those who binge eat twice a week. CONCLUSION: Consistent with previous research, in this sample there were subgroups embedded in the EDNOS category that both share similarities with and differ from full syndrome BN.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".