Functional gastrointestinal symptoms and increased risk for orthorexia nervosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Recent guidelines point out the possible risk for orthorexia nervosa in functional gastrointestinal disorders, however, to date, no study has investigated this association. The present study aimed to explore the potential relationship between irritable bowel syndrome-related functional gastrointestinal symptoms and certain maladaptive eating behaviours, such as symptoms of orthorexia nervosa and emotional eating. METHODS: = 3.95) completed a survey with the following questionnaires: the Rome IV Diagnostic Questionnaire (R4DQ) for adults-Irritable bowel syndrome module for the measurement of functional gastrointestinal symptoms, the Hungarian version of the ORTO-15 questionnaire (ORTO-11-Hu) to assess symptoms of orthorexia nervosa, the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ) Emotional Eating subscale to measure symptoms of emotional eating and the Short Health Anxiety Inventory (SHAI) for the assessment of health anxiety. Spearman's rank correlation was used to explore the associations between the measured variables, and structural equation modeling was used to test the proposed mediation models. RESULTS: Functional gastrointestinal symptoms were positively related to symptoms of orthorexia nervosa and emotional eating. The relationship between functional gastrointestinal symptoms and symptoms of orthorexia nervosa was partially mediated by health anxiety, while the association between functional gastrointestinal symptoms and symptoms of emotional eating was partially mediated by symptoms of orthorexia nervosa. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the possible risk for developing orthorexic symptoms in functional gastrointestinal symptoms, which could lead to other types of disordered eating patterns, such as emotional eating. The results also underscore the potential role of health anxiety in these relationships. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V (descriptive cross-sectional study).
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.005 | 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".