Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDovey, T-
dc.contributor.authorAldridge, V-
dc.contributor.authorMartin, CI-
dc.contributor.authorWilken, M-
dc.contributor.authorMeyer, C-
dc.identifier.citationEating Behaviors, 23: pp. 162–167, (2016)en_US
dc.description.abstractThis study assessed the specificity and sensitivity of two commonly used psychometric methods to assess ARFID in children. To achieve this, a sample of 329 mothers and one father completed the Behavioral Pediatrics Feeding Assessment Scale (BPFAS) and the Child Food Neophobia Scale (CFNS). A Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis indicated that both measures were able to successfully differentiate a known clinical sample from those of typically developing population. Although the BPFAS was more accurate at differentiating ARFID from the general population, the CFNS was acceptable and on some metrics better than its longer counterpart. The ability of a food neophobia scale to differentiate clinical and population samples, and detect gradation of food avoidance within the population sample, suggests that the multitude of psychometric measures available may be measuring similar constructs. Therefore, confidence can be expected in cross-site comparisons despite each using different psychometric measures of food avoidance in children.en_US
dc.subjectAvoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorderen_US
dc.titleScreening Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID) in Children: Outcomes from utilitarian versus specialist psychometrics.en_US
dc.relation.isPartOfEating Behaviors-
Appears in Collections:Dept of Life Sciences Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Fulltext.docxFile is embargoed until: 20/12/201865.4 kBUnknownView/Open

Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.