Evaluation of the XXXX severity indicator for @entity5550 in a clinical sample.

@entity1 @entity308 @entity6426 @entity4987 @entity1277 @entity5550
OBJECTIVE: This study tested the new @entity4987 severity criterion for @entity5550 ( @entity5550 ) based on frequency of @entity6426 in a clinical sample. This study also tested overvaluation of shape/weight as an alternative severity specifier. METHOD: @entity1 were 834 treatment-seeking adults diagnosed with @entity4987 @entity5550 using semi-structured diagnostic and @entity1277 interviews. @entity1 sub-grouped based on @entity4987 severity levels and on overvaluation of shape/weight were compared on demographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: Based on @entity4987 severity definitions, 331 (39.7%) @entity1 were categorized as mild, 395 (47.5%) as moderate, 83 (10.0%) as severe, and 25 (3.0%) as extreme. Analyses comparing three (mild, moderate, and severe/extreme) severity groups revealed no significant differences in demographic variables or body mass index (BMI). Analyses revealed significantly higher @entity1277 psychopathology in the severe/extreme than moderate and mild groups and higher @entity308 in moderate and severe/extreme groups than the mild group; effect sizes were small. @entity1 characterized with overvaluation (N  =  449; 54%) versus without overvaluation (N  =  384; 46%) did not differ significantly in age, sex, BMI, or @entity6426 frequency, but had significantly greater @entity1277 psychopathology and @entity308 . The robustly greater @entity1277 psychopathology and @entity308 levels (medium-to-large effect sizes) in the overvaluation group was observed without attenuation of effect sizes after adjusting for ethnicity/race and @entity6426 severity/frequency. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide support for overvaluation of shape/weight as a severity specifier for @entity5550 as it provides stronger information about the severity of homogeneous groupings of @entity1 than the @entity4987 rating based on @entity6426 .
