Distinct personality profiles associated with disease risk and diagnostic status in eating disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personality traits have been associated with eating disorders (EDs) and comorbidities. However, it is unclear which personality profiles are premorbid risk rather than diagnostic markers. We explored associations between personality and ED-related mental health symptoms using canonical correlation analyses. We investigated personality risk profiles in a longitudinal sample, associating personality at age 14 with onset of mental health symptoms at ages 16 or 19. Diagnostic markers were identified in a sample of young adults with anorexia nervosa (AN, n = 58) or bulimia nervosa (BN, n = 63) and healthy controls (n = 47). Two significant premorbid risk profiles were identified, successively explaining 7.93 % and 5.60 % of shared variance (Rc2). The first combined neuroticism (canonical loading, rs = 0.68), openness (rs = 0.32), impulsivity (rs = 0.29), and conscientiousness (rs = 0.27), with future onset of anxiety symptoms (rs = 0.87) and dieting (rs = 0.58). The other, combined lower agreeableness (rs = −0.60) and lower anxiety sensitivity (rs = −0.47), with future deliberate self-harm (rs = 0.76) and purging (rs = 0.55). Personality profiles associated with “core psychopathology” in both AN (Rc2 = 80.56 %) and BN diagnoses (Rc2 = 64.38 %) comprised hopelessness (rs = 0.95, 0.87) and neuroticism (rs = 0.93, 0.94). For BN, this profile also included impulsivity (rs = 0.60). Additionally, extraversion (rs = 0.41) was associated with lower depressive risk in BN. The samples were not ethnically diverse. The clinical cohort included only females. There was non-random attrition in the longitudinal sample. The results suggest neuroticism and impulsivity as risk and diagnostic markers for EDs, with neuroticism and hopelessness as shared diagnostic markers. They may inform the design of more personalised prevention and intervention strategies.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".