4.4 Review

Rigor and reproducibility via laboratory studies of eating behavior: A focused update and conceptual review

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EATING DISORDERS
卷 51, 期 7, 页码 608-616

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/eat.22900

关键词

eating behavior; laboratory studies; objective assessment; reproducibility; rigor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The eating behavior of individuals with eating disorders has been examined in laboratory settings over the last 30 years. In this focused review, we build on prior research and highlight several feeding laboratory paradigms that have successfully demonstrated quantifiable and observable behavioral disturbances, and thereby add rigor and reproducibility to the examination of disturbances of eating behavior. This review describes the measures commonly obtained via these laboratory techniques. Supporting Information Appendices with detailed information about implementation are provided to allow for the reproducible execution of these techniques across labs. Methods/Results: Literature documenting the existence of objective abnormalities in eating behavior among individuals with eating disorders or in comparison to healthy controls (n > 40) is briefly summarized. These protocols, conducted across at least 17 independent labs, are sensitive and reproducible, can be used to assess subjective and physiological parameters associated with eating, and elucidate the impact of treatment. Laboratory studies from patients with eating disorders compared with healthy controls reproducibly demonstrate both that patients with Anorexia Nervosa ingest fewer calories and that individuals with Bulimia Nervosa and Binge-Eating Disorder ingest more calories when asked to binge-eat. Discussion: Feeding laboratory studies have the potential for quantifying the characteristic behavioral psychopathology of patients with eating disorders, and may provide a useful tool to explore the potential utility of new treatments for individuals with Anorexia Nervosa, Bulimia Nervosa, and Binge-Eating Disorder.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据