We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Diabetic patients are asked to focus on their eating habits and calories intake. Together with individual factors, this could increase the risk of developing Eating Disorders (ED) associated with diabetes. A score of 20 points at the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) scale is considered as a valid threshold to identify Disordered Eating Behaviours (DEB) in diabetic patients. DEB can be considered as altered eating behaviours not fully meeting criteria for ED. As DEB are not formally recognised as specific ED in DSM-5, there is a great risk of not detecting them, thus underestimate their consequences.
Objectives
To meta-analyse literature on ED and DEB, when in comorbidity with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, focusing on pathological medical consequences.
Methods
PRISMA guidelines were followed for this meta-analysis. Articles were identified in literature by searching into PubMed, PsycINFO and Embase.
Results
1141 records were identified through database search. Figure 1 shows six studies comparing HbA1c % values for 2857 diabetic patients versus 752 diabetic patients with DEB. HbA1c % levels appear to be higher in patients with DEPS-R ≥ 20, compared to those with DESP-R scores below 20.
Conclusions
Routine screening for DEB using DEPS-R scale could favour early identification of diabetic individuals, at risk for progression into a proper ED. Clinicians should be vigilant about potential DEB when patients show poor long-term glycaemic control; similarly, patients with a DEPS-R score over 20 points may require more frequent glycaemic checks. This could help prevent serious medical complications.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.