MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217211656 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.745857

Do Emotion Dysregulation, Alexithymia and Personality Dimensions Explain the Association Between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Binge Eating Among Bariatric Surgery Candidates?

2021· article· en· W3217211656 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah El Archi, Paul Brunault, A. De Luca, Samuele Cortese, R. Hankard, Céline Bourbao-Tournois, Nicolas Ballon, Christian Réveillère, Servane Barrault

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaToronto Alexithymia ScaleEmotional dysregulationFood addictionPsychologyEmotional eatingBinge eatingClinical psychologyNeuroticismAddictionConscientiousnessBinge-eating disorderAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderPsychiatryPersonalityEating disordersObesityBig Five personality traitsMedicineExtraversion and introversionBulimia nervosaEating behaviorInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Addictive-like eating and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are both common among persons seeking treatment for severe obesity. Given that ADHD and addictive-like eating, especially binge eating (BE) and food addiction (FA), are both strongly associated with personality dimensions and emotion dysregulation, it is possible emotional and personality characteristics contribute to the link between addictive-like eating behaviors and ADHD in people with severe obesity. This study aimed to investigate the psychological factors associated with BE and FA in bariatric surgery candidates, and to explore the mediational role of emotional factors (emotion dysregulation and alexithymia) and personality dimensions in the association between ADHD and BE. Method: Two hundred and eighty-two (n = 282) bariatric surgery candidates were recruited during the systematic preoperative psychiatric assessment (University Hospital of Tours, France). We assessed significant BE (Binge Eating Scale), probable adult ADHD (Wender Utah Render Scale and Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale), FA (Yale Food Addiction Scale 2.0, YFAS 2.0), emotion dysregulation (Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale-16), alexithymia (Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20) and personality dimensions (Big Five Inventory). Mediation analyses were performed using the PROCESS macro for IBM SPSS Statistics 22. Results: Prevalence of probable adult ADHD, significant BE and FA were 8.2, 19.1, and 26.6%, respectively. Participants who screened positive for addictive-like eating showed higher prevalence of probable adult ADHD, as well as higher scores on adult and childhood ADHD symptoms. They also reported lower conscientiousness, but higher emotion dysregulation, higher alexithymia, and higher neuroticism. Only BE (as opposed to FA) was also associated with lower scores on agreeableness and openness. Analysis of the association between adult ADHD and BE suggests that emotion dysregulation, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and neuroticism are total mediators and alexithymia a partial mediator. Conclusion: Our findings suggest a significant association between ADHD and addictive-like eating among bariatric surgery candidates, and also suggest a significant role of emotion dysregulation and personality dimensions in this association. For individuals with ADHD and obesity, eating may be a way to cope with negative emotions, potentially increasing the risk for addictive-like eating behavior.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207