Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-shngb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T01:30:35.440Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Associations between inattention and impulsivity ADHD symptoms and disordered eating risk in a community sample of young adults

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2020

E. Martin*
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
C. T. Dourish
Affiliation:
P1vital, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK
R. Hook
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK Cambridgeshire & Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK Department of Psychiatry, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
S. R. Chamberlain
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK Cambridgeshire & Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK Department of Psychiatry, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
S. Higgs
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
*
Author for correspondence: E. Martin, E-mail: exm360@student.bham.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and trait impulsivity have been associated with disordered eating but are seldom assessed in community studies, or longitudinally and little is known about the mediating mechanisms.

Methods

We tested associations between ADHD symptoms and disordered eating cross-sectionally and between trait impulsivity and disordered eating longitudinally. We utilised data from a normative cohort of young adults (642 participants: 65% female, Mage = 23 years). Participants were classified as high risk or low risk for disordered eating using the SCOFF instrument. In the first two steps of both cross-sectional and longitudinal hierarchical logistic regression models, demographics and covariates were entered. For the cross-sectional regression, Adult ADHD self-report scale (ASRS) scores, separated into inattentive and hyperactive/impulsive symptoms, were entered in the third step. In a separate longitudinal model, Barratt impulsivity scale subscales (attentional, motor and non-planning impulsivity) were entered in the third step. Depression, as assessed by the moods and feelings questionnaire (MFQ), was examined as a mediator.

Results

Cross-sectionally, sex, MFQ score and inattentive symptoms predicted disordered eating risk (model R2 = 20%). Longitudinally, sex, MFQ score and attentional impulsivity predicted disordered eating risk (model R2 = 16%). The relationship between inattentive symptoms and the disordered eating risk was partially mediated by MFQ score, whereas the relationship between attentional impulsivity and the disordered eating risk was fully mediated by MFQ scores.

Conclusions

These data highlight (1) a specific role for inattentive symptoms of ADHD and (2) the importance of both depression and impulsivity in predicting eating disorder risk.

Information

Type
Original Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re- use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Group (ED risk/no ED risk) differences in questionnaire measures of alcohol use, smoking, illicit drug use and disordered eating

Figure 1

Table 2. Summary of binary logistic regression statistics for the cross-sectional analysis (model 3)

Figure 2

Fig. 1. Cross-sectional mediation models. (a) The model shows the relationship between ASRS inattentive symptoms and SCOFF risk. (b) The model shows the relationship between ASRS hyperactive/impulsive symptoms and SCOFF risk. Solid lines reflect significant pathways. Estimates (β) are unstandardised regression coefficients, numbers in parentheses show bootstrapped standard error. All analyses controlled for sex, alcohol use, smoking, illicit drug use, and age. **p < 0.001.

Figure 3

Table 3. Summary of binary logistic regression statistics for the longitudinal analysis (model 3)

Figure 4

Fig. 2. Longitudinal mediation model. Solid lines reflect significant pathways. Estimates (β) are unstandardised regression coefficients, numbers in parentheses show bootstrapped standard error. All analyses controlled for sex, alcohol use, smoking, illicit drug use, and age. **p < 0.001.