Clinical and psychological features of children and adolescents diagnosed with avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder in a pediatric tertiary care eating disorder program: a descriptive study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: (DSM-5) [American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 2013]. Patients with ARFID do not fear gaining weight or have body image distortions. ARFID involves a persistent disturbance in feeding and eating that results in an inability to meet nutritional and/or energy needs with one of the following: weight loss or failure to achieve appropriate weight gain, nutritional deficiency, dependence on enteral feeding or nutritional supplements and significant interference with psychosocial functioning. To date, studies on patients with ARFID have retrospectively applied the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for ARFID to reclassify patients diagnosed with DSM-IV eating disorders. METHODS: A descriptive retrospective chart review was completed on patients less than 18-years diagnosed with ARFID after a comprehensive eating disorder assessment between May 2013 and March 2016. The data collected included demographics, anthropometrics, historical information, clinical features, co-morbid diagnoses, need for inpatient hospitalization and psychometric measures. RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-nine patients were assessed for an eating disorder between May 2013 and March 2016. Of these, 31 (8.4%) received a DSM-5 diagnosis of ARFID. A full chart review was performed on 28 (90.3%) patients. Weight loss or failure to achieve appropriate weight gain was the reason for diagnosis in 96.4% (27/28). All of our patients had 2 or more physical symptoms at the time of diagnosis and 16 (57.1%) had a co-morbid psychiatric disorder. Twenty (71.4%) reported a specific trigger for their eating disturbance. Admission for inpatient hospitalization occurred in 57.1% (16/28) of patients. Thirteen (46.4%) patients had been previously assessed by another specialist for their eating disturbance. None of the patients had elevated scores on commonly used psychometric tests used to assess eating disorders. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to retrospectively determine the incidence of ARFID in children and adolescents using the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria at assessment. The clinical presentation of patients with ARFID is complex with multiple physical symptoms and comorbid psychiatric disorders. Commonly used pediatric eating disorder psychometric measures are not specific for making a diagnosis of ARFID, and may not be sensitive as assessment tools.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".