| Title |
Update on eating disorders: current perspectives on avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder in children and youth
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s82538 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mark L Norris, Wendy J Spettigue, Debra K Katzman |
| Abstract |
Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) is a new eating disorder diagnosis that was introduced in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) fifth edition. The fourth edition of the DSM had failed to adequately capture a cohort of children, adolescents, and adults who are unable to meet appropriate nutritional and/or energy needs, for reasons other than drive for thinness, leading to significant medical and/or psychological sequelae. With the introduction of ARFID, researchers are now starting to better understand the presentation, clinical characteristics, and complexities of this disorder. This article outlines the diagnostic criteria for ARFID with specific focus on children and youth. A case example of a patient with ARFID, factors that differentiate ARFID from picky eating, and the estimated prevalence in pediatric populations are discussed, as well as clinical and treatment challenges that impact health care providers providing treatment for patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 29% |
| Canada | 3 | 18% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 6% |
| Mexico | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 272 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 272 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 34 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 12% |
| Researcher | 22 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 7% |
| Other | 46 | 17% |
| Unknown | 97 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 58 | 21% |
| Psychology | 53 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 30 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 4% |
| Unknown | 105 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 123. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 September 2023.
All research outputs
#341,693
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#39
of 3,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,775
of 400,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#2
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 400,817 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.