4.4 Article

Revisiting Differences in Individuals with Bulimia Nervosa with and without a History of Anorexia Nervosa: Eating Pathology, Personality, and Maltreatment

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EATING DISORDERS
Volume 41, Issue 8, Pages 697-704

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/eat.20567

Keywords

bulimia nervosa; anorexia nervosa; childhood maltreatment; eating pathology; perfectionism; impulsivity

Funding

  1. NIH [1 R01-MH/DK58820, 1 R01-DK61973, 1 R01-MH59100, 1 R01-MH66287, P30-DK50456, K02-MH65919, 1 R01-MH59234]
  2. University of Missouri Research Council
  3. John Simon Guggenheim Foundation
  4. Walden W. and Jean Young Shaw Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Early research in subtyping bulimia nervosa (BN) by history of anorexia nervosa (AN) generally found more similarities than differences, but recent research and limitations of the early work suggest the need to revisit this approach. We examine differences between women with BN with and without a history of AN regarding eating pathology, personality, and childhood maltreatment. Method: Participants were women (aged 18-55) recruited from the community and eating disorder clinics who met DSM-IV criteria for BN; 37 had a history of AN and 101 did not. Participants completed questionnaires related to eating disorder pathology, multidimensional perfectionism, multidimensional impulsivity, and childhood maltreatment. Results: Women with BN and a history of AN had higher levels of dietary restraint and purging and lower body mass indices as well as higher levels of all forms of childhood neglect and abuse. in contrast, no group differences were found for perfectionism or impulsivity dimensions. Conclusion: The group differences in terms of eating pathology and maltreatment have clinical implications. Further research is needed regarding if and how a history of AN among those with BIN may reflect different etiological pathways and predict different outcomes. (C) 2008 by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available