Trauma Exposure, DSM-5 Posttraumatic Stress, and Binge Eating Symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between trauma exposure type, number and type of DSM-5 posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, and binge eating symptoms. METHODS: Data were analyzed from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III: 2012-2013), which surveyed a nationally representative sample of 36,309 non-institutionalized US civilians aged 18 years and older. Trauma exposure, PTSD, and binge eating symptoms were assessed using the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule, DSM-5 Version (AUDADIS-5). Three groups were compared: trauma-exposed individuals with no/low PTSD symptoms, those with subthreshold PTSD, and those with threshold PTSD. RESULTS: Among both men and women, zero-inflated negative binomial regression analyses demonstrated that individuals with subthreshold and threshold PTSD endorsed a greater number of binge eating symptoms than trauma-exposed individuals with no/low PTSD symptoms (unstandardized coefficient [B] range, 0.33-0.92). Relative to witnessing trauma, combat-related trauma was associated with fewer binge eating symptoms in men (B = -0.62, SE = 0.17), while child maltreatment was associated with a greater number of binge eating symptoms in women (B = 0.28, SE = 0.12). Negative cognitions and mood symptoms in particular were associated with a greater number of binge eating symptoms (B range, 0.09-0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Subthreshold and threshold PTSD are associated with binge eating symptoms in both men and women. Similar to drugs and alcohol, binge eating may be used as a strategy to alleviate distressing symptoms of PTSD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".