Self‐reported eating disorder psychopathology prevalence in community‐based female and male Albertans: Gender and age group comparisons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We describe and compare eating disorder (ED) psychopathology prevalence in Canadian females and males across five age groups. METHOD: This secondary data analysis study used the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q) to assess ED psychopathology in 1,316 Alberta community-based female and male participants, aged 15 to 71. RESULTS: Overall, 15.3% of female and 8.2% of male participants reported clinically-significant ED disturbances. Female participants reported greater global ED psychopathology than male participants, except older men and women aged 65-71, who reported similar, relatively low levels of global ED psychopathology. Women aged 65-71 endorsed less global ED psychopathology than younger females. More females than males reported regular binge eating and self-induced vomiting, whereas other ED behaviors were endorsed at similar rates. DISCUSSION: This large-scale study, the first involving a Canadian sample, contributes to a small literature on ED psychopathology in community-based samples. The finding that 15% of female and 8% of male Albertans aged 15 to 71 endorsed clinically-significant ED disturbances is concerning; however, women aged 65-71 reported lower ED psychopathology than younger females. Gender and age differences were observed in global ED psychopathology. Routine ED screening of non-clinical adolescents and adults is warranted to permit prevention and early intervention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".