4.0 Article

A Comparison of Personality, Life Events, Comorbidity, and Health in Monozygotic Twins Discordant for Anorexia Nervosa

期刊

TWIN RESEARCH AND HUMAN GENETICS
卷 20, 期 4, 页码 310-318

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/thg.2017.27

关键词

anorexia nervosa; co-twin control; personality; adverse events; comorbidity

资金

  1. National Institute of Health [1K01AA 18719-01A1, T32MH076694]
  2. Hilda and Preston Davis Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowship Program in Eating Disorders Research Award
  3. Swedish Research Council [538-2013-8864]
  4. National Institutes of Health [CA-085739, AI-056014]
  5. Swedish Department of Higher Education
  6. Swedish Research Council
  7. [T322MH20030]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Genetic and environmental factors contribute to the etiology of anorexia nervosa (AN). The co-twin control design is one of the most powerful methods available to evaluate environmental factors that could contribute to differences between monozygotic (MZ) twins who are discordant for AN. Using available data from a unique and rare sample of 22 Swedish female MZ pairs discordant for AN, we compared personality, life events, comorbidity, and health factors. Twins with AN had significantly higher perfectionism scores than unaffected co-twins and reported younger ages at first diet than unaffected co-twins who had dieted. Consistent with previous literature, more twins with AN reported gastrointestinal problems than unaffected co-twins. Although not significant due to low statistical power, more unaffected co-twins reported experiencing emotional neglect than twins with AN. Early dieting may be a harbinger of the development of AN or an early symptom. Higher perfectionism may represent a risk factor, sequela, or both. Sibling perception of neglect is noteworthy given the impact of an ill child with AN on family function and wellbeing. The health and wellbeing of siblings should be addressed clinically when one child in the family suffers from AN.

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

4.0
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