The Modified Yale Food Addiction Scale 2.0: Validation Among Non-Clinical and Clinical French-Speaking Samples and Comparison With the Full Yale Food Addiction Scale 2.0
Front. Psychiatry. 2020-09-08; 11:
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.480671
Lire sur PubMed
1. Front Psychiatry. 2020 Sep 8;11:480671. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.480671.
eCollection 2020.
The Modified Yale Food Addiction Scale 2.0: Validation Among Non-Clinical and
Clinical French-Speaking Samples and Comparison With the Full Yale Food
Addiction Scale 2.0.
Brunault P(1)(2)(3), Berthoz S(4)(5), Gearhardt AN(6), Gierski F(7)(8),
Kaladjian A(7)(8), Bertin E(9), Tchernof A(10), Biertho L(10), de Luca
A(11)(12), Hankard R(11)(12), Courtois R(3)(13), Ballon N(1)(2), Benzerouk
F(7)(8), Bégin C(14).
Author information:
(1)UMR 1253, iBrain, Université de Tours, Inserm, Tours, France.
(2)CHRU de Tours, Service d’Addictologie Universitaire, Équipe de Liaison et de
Soins en Addictologie, Tours, France.
(3)Qualipsy EE 1901, Université de Tours, Tours, France.
(4)Univ. Bordeaux, CNRS, EPHE, INCIA, UMR 5287, Bordeaux, Paris, France.
(5)Département de Psychiatrie de l’Adolescent et du Jeune Adulte, Institut
Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.
(6)Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United
States.
(7)CHU de Reims, Pôle de Psychiatrie adulte, Hôpital Robert Debré, Reims,
France.
(8)Université Reims Champagne-Ardenne (URCA), laboratoire C2S (EA 6291), Reims,
France.
(9)CHU de Reims, Service d’Endocrinologie-Diabète-Nutrition, Hôpital
Robert-Debré, Reims, France.
(10)Institut de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec, Université Laval,
Québec, QC, Canada.
(11)CHRU de Tours, Service de Médecine Interne-Nutrition, Tours, France.
(12)Université de Tours, Inserm, UMR 1069, Tours, France.
(13)CHRU de Tours, Clinique Psychiatrique Universitaire, CRIAVS, Tours, France.
(14)École de Psychologie, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.
OBJECTIVES: The modified Yale Food Addiction Scale 2.0 (mYFAS 2.0) was designed
to assess food addiction using a shorter version than the YFAS 2.0. We lack data
about the psychometric properties of the mYFAS 2.0 in patients with obesity, as
well as studies comparing the psychometric properties of the mYFAS 2.0 versus
the full YFAS 2.0. This study aimed to validate the French-language mYFAS 2.0 in
a non-clinical population (study 1, n = 250), to determine the yet unknown
psychometric properties of this scale in patients with obesity (study 2, n =
345), and to compare the full YFAS 2.0 and the mYFAS 2.0 in terms of food
addiction (FA) prevalence and symptoms detection in both populations.
METHOD: Study 1 included 250 non-clinical individuals (non-underweight and
non-obese persons screened negative for eating disorders). Study 2 included 345
bariatric surgery candidates recruited in three centers (Québec, Canada; Reims
and Tours, France). The mYFAS 2.0 structure was investigated using confirmatory
factorial analyses with tetrachoric correlations. Convergent validity was tested
using the full YFAS 2.0, the Binge Eating Scale (both studies), the revised
18-item Three Factor Eating Questionnaire (study 1), the Beck Depression
Inventory (study 2), and the body mass index (BMI; both studies).
RESULTS: The mYFAS 2.0 was unidimensional, and had adequate (study 1: KR-20 =
.78) and acceptable (study 2: KR-20 = .73) internal consistency. In study 1, the
mYFAS 2.0 had good convergent validity with the YFAS 2.0, BMI, binge eating,
cognitive restraint, uncontrolled eating and emotional eating; in study 2, the
mYFAS 2.0 had good convergent validity with the YFAS 2.0, binge eating,
depression, but not BMI. Participants endorsed fewer symptoms with the mYFAS 2.0
than with the YFAS 2.0; FA prevalences were similar between questionnaires in
the non-clinical, but not in the clinical sample. A FA ‘diagnosis’ and risk of
binge eating disorder were associated but did not completely overlap.
CONCLUSIONS: The mYFAS 2.0 has close psychometric properties to the YFAS 2.0 in
non-clinical and clinical samples. However, the use of the mYFAS 2.0 in
bariatric surgery candidates might lead to a significant underestimation of FA
prevalence and number of FA symptoms.
Copyright © 2020 Brunault, Berthoz, Gearhardt, Gierski, Kaladjian, Bertin,
Tchernof, Biertho, de Luca, Hankard, Courtois, Ballon, Benzerouk and Bégin.
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.480671
PMCID: PMC7509420
PMID: 33033480