Skip to main content

Table 2 Sources focusing on childhood exposure to emotional abuse

From: Consequences of child emotional abuse, emotional neglect and exposure to intimate partner violence for eating disorders: a systematic critical review

Author, Country Design (cross-sectional, longitudinal) Sample Type (college, community, primary care, tertiary psychiatric care) Sample Size (n) Sample Characteristics
• % Female
• % Ethnic-minority
• % Immigrant
Age Range (years) Strength of Correlation for EA
Eating Disorders
 Utzinger et al. [33], USA* cross-sectional tertiary psychiatric care, college, community n = 133 • 100%
• 3%
• Unclear
18 to 55 > 0.85a**
 Bardone-Cone et al. [49], USA* cross-sectional community, tertiary psychiatric care n = 138 • 100%
• 13%
• Unclear
18 to 55 0.11–0.25a**
 Kugu et al. [39] Turkey cross-sectional college n = 42 • 85.7%
• Unclear
• Unclear
18 to 24 0.51–0.75c**
 Schoemaker et al. [34], Netherlands cross-sectional community n = 1926 • 100%
• Unclear
• Unclear
18 to 45 0.26–0.50a**
 Grilo and Masheb [37], USA* cross-sectional primary care, tertiary psychiatric care n = 1, 241 • 97.9%
• 19.8%
• Unclear
18 to 65 0.26–0.50c
 Mullen et al. [51], New Zealand cross-sectional community n = 497 • 100%
• Unclear
• Unclear
18 and over 0.26–0.50a**
 Rorty et al. [50], USA* cross-sectional community, college, tertiary psychiatric care n = 120 • 100%
• Unclear
• Unclear
18 to 35 0.11–0.25a**
Eating-Disordered Behavior
 Feinson and Hornik-Lurie [32], Jerusalem cross-sectional primary care n = 498 • 100%
• Unclear
• Unclear
21 and older 0.11–0.25a**
 Mason et al. [30], USA longitudinal community n = 4, 377 • 100%
• ~ 3.2%
• Unclear
22 to 29 0.11–0.25ad**
0.26–0.50ae**
 Michopoulos et al. [17], USA cross-sectional primary care n = 1, 110 • 80.4%
• 97.4%
• Unclear
18 to 65 0.11–0.25c**
 Moulton et al. [14], Scotland cross-sectional college n = 142 • 100%
• Unclear
• Unclear
18 to 46 0.26–0.50a**
 Brooke and Mussap [41], cross-sectional college n = 299 • 52%
• Unclear
• Unclear
18 to 40 0.01–0.10cf
0.11–0.25b**
0.26–0.50a**
 Burns et al. [40], USA* cross-sectional college n = 1, 254 • 100%
• 22.3%
• Unclear
18 to 22 0.01–0.10a
0.11–0.25a**
 Becker and Grilo [36], USA* cross-sectional tertiary psychiatric care n = 137 • 100%
• 15%
• Unclear
20 to 59 0.01–0.10af
 Messman-Moore and Garrigus [43], USA* cross-sectional college n = 289 • 100%
• 9%
• Unclear
18 to 22 0.26–0.50a**
 Wonderlich et al. [44], USA* longitudinal college, community, tertiary psychiatric care n = 123 • 100%
• 3.3%
• Unclear
18 to 55 0.11–0.25a**
 Witkiewitz and Dodge-Reyome [46], USA cross-sectional college n = 88 • 100%
• 1.0%
• Unclear
18 to 25 0.26–0.50a**
 Kent et al. [47], United Kingdom cross-sectional college n = 236 • 100%
• Unclear
• Unclear
18 to 48 0.11–0.25a**
0.26–0.50a**
Eating Disorders and Eating-Disordered Behavior
 Grilo and Masheb [38], USA* cross-sectional primary care, tertiary psychiatric care n = 1, 270 • 97.3%
• 19.8%
• Unclear
18 to 65 0.11–0.25c**
  1. * Country of data collection not articulated. Assumption of country location was made given language used to describe participants (e.g. African American) or based upon identification of the location of the study’s Institutional Review Board
  2. ** Authors reported at least one bivariate correlation estimate to be significant at p < .05
  3. aEstimate falls within this range among women
  4. b Estimate falls within this range among men
  5. cEstimate falls within this range among men and women
  6. d Estimate computed through converting risk ratios to odds ratios, and then, to a correlation coefficient. Correlation represents strength of correlation between moderate abuse exposure prior to the age 11 years and lifetime binge eating disorder after age 11
  7. e Estimate computed through converting risk ratios to odds ratios, and then, to a correlation coefficient. Correlation represents strength of correlation between severe abuse exposure prior to the age 11 years and binge eating disorder after age 11
  8. f Estimate reported was non-significant