Neuropsychological Profiles in Patients With Restrictive or Binge/Purge Subtype Eating Disorders: A Continuum Approach
This study examined neuropsychological profiles in 69 patients with restrictive or binge/purge eating disorders. Both groups showed similar cognitive inefficiencies—particularly in central coherence, impulsivity, and self-reported executive functioning—compared to norms. Each group also had distinct strengths: restrictive types excelled at set-shifting, while binge/purge types performed well on planning tasks. Depressive symptoms were linked to self-reported, but not performance-based, executive difficulties. Findings highlight the complexity of assessing cognitive function in ED populations.
Forfatter
Camilla Lindvall Dahlgren
Medforfatter
Tora Thorsrud, Linda Thorsen, Odin Hjemdal, Nadia Micali & Siri Weider
Tidskrift
European Eating Disorders Review
Abstract
Objective
Eating disorders (EDs) are associated with neuropsychological inefficiencies across diagnoses. A transdiagnostic approach may help clarify how neuropsychological factors contribute to ED psychopathology. This study aimed to investigate the neuropsychological profiles in patients with restrictive or binge/purge subtype of EDs.
Methods
Sixty-nine patients with restrictive or binge/purge subtype of EDs participated. Neuropsychological functioning was assessed using a comprehensive battery of tests. Neuropsychological outcomes were compared between the two groups, and with normative scores. Multiple linear regression was used to investigate potential predictors of neuropsychological inefficiencies.
Results
The subgroups displayed similar performance on most cognitive measures. Compared to normative scores inefficiencies related to central coherence, impulsivity, and self-reported executive functioning difficulties were observed in both groups. In addition, the restrictive subgroup demonstrated better set-shifting abilities, while the binge/purge subgroup excelled on a planning task. A significant association was found between depressive symptoms and self-reported executive function difficulties, but not with performance-based measures.
Conclusion
The findings suggest similar cognitive inefficiencies across ED subtypes. However, each group demonstrated some distinct cognitive strengths compared to normative scores. Findings underscore discrepancies between performance-based and self-reported executive functioning assessment, raising questions about ecological validity, and the distinctiveness of cognitive measures in this population.
Trail Registration: The current study utilises baseline data from a randomised controlled trail (ClinicalTrials.gov Id: NCT03808467)