ABSTRACT

Missing or inconsistent responses on self-report assessments can have implications for the use of empirically validated measurements in research and clinical practice. However, literature on frequency and systematic patterns of missingness on common measures of eating pathology is lacking. The current study evaluated EDE-Q missing and inconsistent responding in a clinical eating disorders (EDs) sample (N = 739). Thirteen percent (13.4%; n = 99) of the sample failed to provide complete responses on the EDE-Q and 13.8% (n = 101) inconsistently responded to behavioral items of the EDE-Q. Males were more likely to provide missing data, and mean BMI was higher among individuals with missing responses. Inconsistent responders endorsed higher scores on several EDE-Q subscales, were younger, and were more likely to be Hispanic/Latinx. However, many of these differences were not significant following correction for multiple comparisons. Although our results indicated similar rates of missingness and inconsistency to past work in college samples, our results suggest that missing and inconsistent responding on the EDE-Q in clinical samples may not warrant specialized consideration within statistical analyses.

摘要

对自我报告评估的缺失或不一致的反应可能会对研究和临床实践中经验验证测量的使用产生影响。然而，缺乏关于饮食病理学常见措施缺失频率和系统模式的文献。当前的研究评估了临床饮食失调 (ED) 样本 (N = 739) 中的 EDE-Q 缺失和不一致的反应。13% (13.4%; n = 99) 的样本未能对 EDE-Q 提供完整的反应，13.8% (n = 101) 对 EDE-Q 的行为项目的反应不一致。男性更有可能提供缺失的数据，并且在响应缺失的个体中平均 BMI 更高。不一致的响应者在几个 EDE-Q 分量表上支持更高的分数，更年轻，并且更有可能是西班牙裔/拉丁裔。然而，经过多重比较校正后，其中许多差异并不显着。尽管我们的结果表明大学样本中的缺失率和不一致率与过去的工作相似，但我们的结果表明，临床样本中 EDE-Q 的缺失和不一致响应可能不值得在统计分析中进行专门考虑。