MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4381330589 · doi:10.1101/2023.06.14.23291397

Test-retest reliability of a 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional visual assessment of body image disturbance in anorexia nervosa

2023· preprint· en· W4381330589 on OpenAlexaff
Christina Ralph‐Nearman, Armen C. Arevian, Andrew Karem, Tomás F. Llano-Ríos, Megan Sinik, Scott E. Moseman, Jamie D. Feusner, Sahib S. Khalsa

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of General Medical SciencesWilliam K. Warren Foundation
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)PsychologyAvatarAnorexia nervosaIntraclass correlationTest (biology)PerceptionAudiologyClinical psychologyEating disordersPsychometricsComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Body image disturbance (BID) is a diagnostic feature of anorexia nervosa (AN), with few reliable visual perceptual or attitudinal markers. Somatomap is a 2-dimensional (2D) and 3-dimensional (3D) digital assessment of BID, which has demonstrated utility. Test-retest reliability of Somatomap 2D and 3D digital assessment of BID in AN was examined. Fifty-nine inpatient participants with AN performed test-retest by a) outlining body concern areas on a 2D avatar for each independent area of concern; and b) sculpting 23 independent body parts on a randomized 3D avatar to reflect their perceived body size in length and girth. Participants corresponding body parts were physically measured to calculate discrepancy scores (i.e., 3D perceived minus measured values). Regional 2D BID test-retest differences were evaluated using z-scores to generate statistical visual body maps. Test-retest of 3D assessment reliability was evaluated by Intraclass Correlation Coefficient for individual and aggregated body parts. Somatomap 2D demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability with no statistical differences between test and retest z-scores. All 23 body parts on Somatomap 3D demonstrated statistically significant fair-to-excellent test-retest reliability in AN. Regions that are commonly of concern in AN, and combined measures, showed the highest reliability. Results suggest that Somatomap 2D and 3D may provide a reliable perceptual marker of visual BID in AN.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicEating Disorders and Behaviors→French-language works237,207→