Translation and Evaluation of the Reliability and Validity of Eating Disorder Inventory-3 Referral form Questionnaire Among Iranian University Students: A Cross-sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Undiagnosed eating disorders may lead to a life-threatening condition, then a validated and reliable tool that lets health providers use it for effective screening is a mandatory need. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the Eating Disorder Inventory-3 Referral Form (EDI-3 RF). Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 452 university students and employees were recruited by convenience sampling from the Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. The content validity was assessed using the five specialists, and then the content validity index (CVI) and content validity ratio (CVR) was calculated separately. The reliability was measured with Cronbach’s alpha and test-retest. Results: Overall, 260 participants filled out the questionnaire completely. The mean age of participants was 22.34 ± 4.18 years. The mean weight was 64 kg (range: 40 - 115). This version of EDI-3 RF yields acceptable content validity and item correlation. According to the expert’s opinion, CVR was more than 0.99 for all inquiries. Also, the CVI for each item was greater than 0.79, which indicates the acceptable value of this index for different items in terms of relevance, clarity, and simplicity. Also, the face validity was approved according to participants’ and experts’ opinions. Cronbach’s alpha for measuring the three subscales of an eating disorder were acceptable (drive for thinness (DT) = 0.76 and 0.77, bulimia (B) = 0.71 and 0.72, and body dissatisfaction (BD) = 0.77 and 0.71, respectively). The correlation coefficient between two questionnaires was 0.48 (P < 0.01). The coefficient between the subscales and whole parts of this questionnaire was 0.58, 0.53, 0.66, 0.48, 0.34, and 0.43, respectively (P < 0.01). Conclusions: This questionnaire would be a beneficial self-response questionnaire, and because of its abbreviated format, it can be used as a screening and referral tool in the Persian population.
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 | 0.013 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".