4.7 Article

The prevalence, correlates, and help-seeking of eating disorders in Switzerland

期刊

PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE
卷 46, 期 13, 页码 2749-2758

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291716001136

关键词

Eating disorders; epidemiology; population survey; prevalence

资金

  1. Swiss Federal Office of Public Health [09. 006170/204.0001/-675, 10.005736/204.0001/-782]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Eating disorders (EDs) have long-term physical and mental impacts on those affected. However, few population-based studies have estimated the prevalence of EDs. We aimed to estimate the lifetime and 12-month prevalence rates of EDs using DSM-IV criteria, and to examine differences against the DSM-5 criteria for anorexia. Method A nationally representative sample of 10 038 residents in Switzerland was interviewed, and prevalence rates for anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), and binge eating disorder (BED) were assessed using WHO Composite International Diagnostic Interviews (WHO-CIDI). Results The lifetime prevalence rate for any ED was found to be 3.5%. Lifetime prevalence estimates for AN, BN, and/or BED were 1.2%, 2.4%, and 2.4%, respectively, among women and 0.2%, 0.9%, and 0.7%, respectively, among men. Utilizing the DSM-5 criteria, the prevalence of AN in women increased by more than 50%, from 1.2% to 1.9%. Among those meeting the criteria for any ED, only 49.4% of men and 67.9% of women had ever sought professional help about their problems with eating or weight. Conclusions The higher prevalence of BN we detected relative to other studies should prompt further monitoring for a possible increasing trend. The female v. male ratios, especially for bulimia and BED, are decreasing. Given that more than half of those affected have never consulted any professional about their problems with eating or weight, routine inquiries about eating and weight by clinicians, school teachers/psychologists, and family members may help those who are at risk, especially among men.

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

4.7
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