MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406243896 · doi:10.1186/s40337-024-01162-1

Binge eating disorder recognition and stigma among an adult community sample

2025· article· en· W4406243896 on OpenAlex
Marilou Côté, Marie-Pier Roy, Christopher Rodrigue, Catherine Bégin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eating Disorders · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsVignettePsychosocialStigma (botany)RespondentBinge-eating disorderPsychologyClinical psychologyHelp-seekingPsychiatryEating disordersMental healthSocial psychologyBulimia nervosa

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite being the most prevalent eating disorder, Binge eating disorder (BED) remains largely unrecognized and lacks awareness among the general public, where it is also highly stigmatized. Common stigma surrounding BED includes the belief that individuals with this disorder are responsible for their condition and lack willpower and self-control. Research on BED recognition and stigma among lay adults is scarce. Enhancing public recognition of BED and reducing the stigma associated with it is crucial, as this could significantly improve access to treatment. The aim of the present study was to examine BED recognition and stigma within an adult community sample, and to identify associated respondent characteristics, including sociodemographic and psychosocial factors. METHODS: = 35.20 ± 14.52) completed an online survey. Participants were presented with a vignette depicting a woman with BED and obesity, followed by questionnaires assessing BED recognition, stigma, and other respondent characteristics. Independent samples t-tests were performed to compare participants who recognized BED in the vignette with those who did not, based on sociodemographic characteristics (i.e., gender, age, income, education) and psychosocial variables (i.e., explicit and internalized weight bias, familiarity with BED). A multiple linear regression analysis was performed to identify the sociodemographic and psychosocial variables that were the most important in explaining the variance in stigma towards BED. RESULTS: Results indicated that 33% of participants identified BED as the main problem in the vignette. Those who recognized BED were younger, more educated, more familiar with BED, and exhibited lower levels of stigma towards BED. The most significant factor in explaining stigma towards BED was explicit weight bias, particularly attributing obesity to a lack of willpower and disliking people with obesity. Identifying as a man and older age were also associated with greater stigma towards BED. CONCLUSION: The findings of the current study highlight the importance of comprehensive public awareness campaigns to improve recognition of BED and to reduce associated stigma.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.292 · 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