Objective: Little is known about the prevalence and clinical presentation of avoidant restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) in preschool children, and well-validated, parent-reported screening tools are lacking. This study evaluated the diagnostic validity of the parent-reported ARFID-Brief Screener in preschool children and examined prevalence and clinical characteristics of ARFID. Method: Parents of 645 children (50.5% male, mean age 3.2 years) completed the ARFID-Brief Screener in connection with the 2.5- and 4-year routine check-ups at 21 child health services centers in West Sweden. Parents of all screen-positive and of randomly selected screen-negative children were invited to a clinical follow-up interview via phone. Co-occurring neurodevelopmental problems were assessed via questionnaire, clinical examination, and health care records. Results: Of 42 (6.5%) children screening positive for ARFID, 29 were followed up via interview, and ARFID diagnosis was confirmed in 21 (positive predicted value 72%; other diagnostic metrics: negative predictive value 94%, sensitivity 91%, specificity 79%, and overall accuracy 84%. The adjusted prevalence of ARFID was 5.9%. All children with ARFID presented with both sensory-based avoidance and low interest, and the majority (65.2%) met criteria solely through DSM-5 criterion A4 (marked interference with psychosocial functioning). The ARFID group had significantly more co-occurring neurodevelopmental problems. Discussion: ARFID is not rare among preschoolers, although prevalence might have been slightly overestimated here. The ARFID-Brief Screener showed high diagnostic validity, but follow-up assessments are necessary to confirm diagnoses and reduce false positives. Co-occurring neurodevelopmental problems were common in ARFID and may serve as early markers of increased ARFID risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dinkler et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: