DClinPsy Portfolio Volume 1 of 3 - University of Hertfordshire ...

As is evident from Table 3 there are no obese participants in this sample when using the
U.K classification system. Using the U.S classification system therefore yields a different
set of frequencies as they have a ‘risk of overweight’ and an ‘overweight’ group.
Due to the differing results produced by the different categorisation percentiles and in
order to have groups large enough for meaningful comparisons the U.S classification
system was used and those at risk of becoming overweight were grouped with those
classified as overweight into one group. Moreover, the U.S system was broader and has
been used frequently in research studies in both countries as well as internationally. It
was also thought to be consistent with using U.S measures e.g. EDI-3.
3- EDR classification
In order to test the primary hypotheses investigating the risk of an eating disorder in
relation to the clinical variables, EDR was divided into the categories displayed in table 4
below.
Table 4: Frequency counts and percentages of Eating Disorder Risk categories
Eating Disorder Risk categories (percentiles
from normed data)
Frequency (%)
Low Risk (less than 90 th percentile) 68 (71%)
Moderate Risk (91 st and 98 th percentiles) 17 (18%)
High Risk (99 th percentile) 11 (11%)
Total 96 (100%)
As can be seen from Table 4 the majority i.e. 71% of the sample fell in the low risk
category. This is as might be expected from a non clinical population of adolescents at
school. Nearly 18% scored at the moderate risk level and 11% scored in the high risk
level which suggests this minority of adolescent females may have a clinical eating
disorder or serious eating concerns or symptoms.
4 – History of mental health, eating problems and critical life events
162