Comparative utility of the DSM‐5 and ICD‐11 diagnostic classifications of eating disorders of recurrent binge eating in an Australian community‐based sample.

BULIMIA diagnosis; BULIMIA; RESEARCH funding; BINGE-eating disorder; STATISTICAL sampling; QUESTIONNAIRES; FISHER exact test; CLASSIFICATION of mental disorders; CHI-squared test; MANN Whitney U Test; DESCRIPTIVE statistics; FOOD habits; QUALITY of life; COMPARATIVE studies; CONFIDENCE intervals; DATA analysis software; NOSOLOGY

Objective: The present study aimed to compare the estimated prevalence, sociodemographic features and impacts of Bulimia Nervosa (BN), Binge Eating Disorder (BED) and Other Specified Feeding or Eating Disorder (OSFED; BN or BED of low frequency and/or limited duration) when comparing the DSM‐5 with the broader ICD‐11 diagnostic criteria for size and specifiers of binge‐eating episodes in a general population epidemiological sample. Methods: 2977 individuals (1524 women and 1453 men) aged ≥15 years from randomly selected households in South Australia were interviewed in person. Participants were asked questions relating to sociodemographic features, symptoms of eating disorder pathology, physical and mental health‐related quality of life (HRQoL; SF‐12) and role impairment. Results: The estimated prevalence of only one diagnosis, namely BED, was lower when applying DSM‐5 criteria than when applying ICD‐11 criteria, largely due to the Criterion B binge‐eating specifiers of the DSM‐5. There were no significant differences in participants' demographic features, HRQoL, or role impairment between the comparable diagnosis of either scheme. Conclusions: There were few differences in distribution and similar levels of health impacts when applying either diagnostic scheme in this epidemiological study. However, cases of BED may be missed when using the stricter criteria of DSM‐5 in epidemiological surveys. Further studies are needed to assess the clinical utility of the DSM‐5 and ICD‐11 diagnostic specifiers of binge‐eating. Highlights: In a representative sample of the Australian general population the estimated prevalence of BED was significantly lower when applying DSM‐5 criteria than when applying ICD‐11 criteria.The estimated prevalence of BN or OSFED did not differ when applying DSM‐5 criteria or when applying ICD‐11 criteria.Participants with a BN, BED or OSFED diagnosis experienced similar levels of health impacts when either DSM or ICD criteria were applied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of European Eating Disorders Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)