ArticleThe International journal of eating disorders2026
Neurocognitive Profile of Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder: Cognitive Flexibility, Delay Discounting, and Detail Orientation.
Article in The International journal of eating disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveNeurocognitive deficits are well-documented across psychiatric disorders and may indicate novel treatment targets. However, empirical data on the neurocognitive profile of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) are lacking. To address this gap, this study examined three core neurocognitive domains altered in other eating disorders-cognitive flexibility, delay discounting, and detail orientation-in adults with ARFID and healthy controls (HCs).
methodAdults (18-45 years) with ARFID (n = 49) and HCs (n = 21) completed computerized tasks assessing cognitive flexibility (Category Switch Task), delay discounting (Delay Discounting Task), and detail orientation (Navon Task). We hypothesized that, relative to HCs, adults with ARFID would show poorer cognitive flexibility, steeper delay discounting, and greater detail orientation.
resultsCompared to HCs, adults with ARFID showed larger response-time switch costs (U = 9456, p = 0.023) but smaller error-rate switch costs (U = 6832, p = 0.044). Consequently, set-shifting efficiency did not differ between groups (inverse efficiency score switch costs: U = 537, p = 0.672), indicating an accuracy-over-speed strategy supporting cognitive flexibility in ARFID. No group differences emerged in delay discounting (U = 618, p = 0.091) or detail orientation (U = 8016, p = 0.938). Regression analyses indicated that ARFID phenotype severity explained variance in task performance: greater fear of aversive consequences was associated with better set-shifting (p = 0.005), and greater lack of interest with reduced delay discounting (p = 0.004). DISCUSSION: Contrary to expectations, adults with ARFID matched HCs in overall cognitive flexibility efficiency by strategically slowing responses, challenging assumptions of innate cognitive rigidity. Future research should test whether interventions that increase processing speed while preserving accuracy could improve everyday adaptability and eating behaviors in ARFID.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.