Search

BackgroundEating disorder (ED) subtyping studies have often extracted an undercontrolled, an overcontrolled and a resilient profile based on trait impulsivity and perfectionism. However, the extent to which methodological choices impact the coherence and distinctness of resulting subtypes remains unclear.ObjectiveIn this paper, we aimed to assess the robustness of these findings by extracting personality-based subtypes on a sample of ED patients (N = 221) under different analytic conditions.MethodsWe ran four latent profile analyses (LPA), varying the extent to which we constrained variances and covariances during model parametrization. We then performed a comparative analysis also including state ED symptom measures as indicators. Finally, we used cross-method validation via k-means clustering to further assess the robustness of our profiles.ResultsOur results demonstrated a four-profile model based on variances in impulsivity and perfectionism to fit the data well. Across model solutions, the profiles with the most and least state and trait disturbances were replicated most stably, while more nuanced variations in trait variables resulted in less consistent profiles. Inclusion of ED symptoms as indicator variables increased subtype differentiation and similarity across profiles. Validation cluster analyses aligned most with more restrictive LPA models.ConclusionThese results suggest that ED subtypes track true constructs, since subtypes emerged method-independently. We found analytic methods to constrain the theoretical and practical conclusions that can be drawn. This underscores the importance of objective-driven analytic design and highlights its relevance in applying research findings in clinical practice.

IntroductionPersonality-based profiling helps elucidate associations between psychopathology symptoms and address shortcomings of current nosologies. The objective of this study was to bracket the assumption of a priori diagnostic class borders and apply the profiling approach to a transdiagnostic sample. Profiles resembling high-functioning, undercontrolled, and overcontrolled phenotypes were expected to emerge.MethodsWe used latent profile analysis on data from a sample of women with mental disorders (n = 313) and healthy controls (n = 114). 3–5 profile solutions were compared based on impulsivity, perfectionism, anxiety, stress susceptibility, mistrust, detachment, irritability, and embitterment. The best-fitting solution was then related to measures of depression, state anxiety, disordered eating, and emotion regulation difficulties to establish clinical significance.ResultsA 5-profile solution proved best-fitting. Extracted profiles included a high-functioning, a well-adapted, an impulsive and interpersonally dysregulated, an anxious and perfectionistic, and an emotionally and behaviorally dysregulated class. Significant differences were found in all outcome state measures, with the emotionally and behaviorally dysregulated class exhibiting the most severe psychopathology.DiscussionThese results serve as preliminary evidence of the predictive nature and clinical utility of personality-based profiles. Selected personality traits should be considered in case formulation and treatment planning. Further research is warranted to replicate the profiles and assess classification stability and profiles’ association with treatment outcome longitudinally.