Nutritional status and anxious and depressive symptoms in anorexia nervosa: a prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The interweaving of malnutrition and symptoms of anxiety and depression in anorexia Nervosa (AN) is mentioned without any consensus regarding the course of anxious-depressive symptoms in relation to nutritional status in the course of treatment of patients with AN. The objectives of the current study in a large sample of AN inpatients were to assess the relationships between anxiety and depression symptoms and nutritional status both over the course of inpatient treatment and at discharge. 222 consecutive inpatients with AN (DSM-IV TR) were assessed (entrance and discharge) for duration of illness, psychiatric treatments, sociodemographic data and with psychometric scales for different psychopathological symptoms [depressive (BDI), anxiety and depressive (HAD scale), obsessive–compulsive (MOCI) and social phobia (LSAS fear score)]. Nutritional status was assessed with Body Mass Index (BMI) and body composition by bioelectrical impedance. The Fat free mass index [FFMI = FFM (kg)/height (m2)] was considered for the analysis. Two models were developed where the dependent variables were each psychopathological score at discharge (BDI, HAD anxiety, MOCI, and LSAS fear) in the cross-sectional model, and their variation in the longitudinal model (where a positive score reflected symptom decrease at discharge). A fixed set of predictors, defined on presumed clinical and statistical relevance (FFMI in the cross-sectional model and Variation of FFMI in the longitudinal model), were considered in each model, without any model selection procedure. This is the first study to confirm a positive relationship between the course of eating disorder symptoms and that of anxious-depressive symptoms during inpatient treatment of AN even after adjustment on a vast array of possibly confounding factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".