A narrative systematic review of definitions and diagnostic criteria for disordered eating and eating disorders in type 1 diabetes.

Abstract

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Type 1 diabetes and disordered eating (T1DE) affects 8-37.1% of adults and is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. The absence of a standardised case definition of T1DE and its severity hinders effective screening, diagnosis and treatment. This systematic review aimed to (1) synthesise existing case definitions and diagnostic criteria for T1DE in adults and (2) identify key characteristics to inform consensus for future diagnostic criteria. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible studies involved adults (≥18 years) with type 1 diabetes assessing disordered eating; paediatric studies, mixed samples without disaggregated data, non-empirical designs and non-English publications were excluded. PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched up to November 2025 for peer-reviewed studies involving adults with T1DE. Qualitative and quantitative data on definitions, diagnostic criteria and assessment tools were extracted. Study quality was appraised using a modified Graphical Appraisal Tool for Epidemiological studies (GATE) checklist. Due to heterogeneity of data, a narrative synthesis of findings was performed to describe current definitions of T1DE. RESULTS: Sixty-one studies met the inclusion criteria, with a pooled sample of 111,208 participants (76% women) from over 22 countries. T1DE was defined using a heterogeneous array of terms, diagnostic frameworks and assessment tools (29 distinct methods). The Diabetes Eating Problem Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) was the most used questionnaire, but many studies relied on criteria adapted from general eating disorder classifications or generic questionnaires. Approximately three-quarters of the studies assessed insulin omission behaviours, but the operationalisation of the cognitions for insulin omission varied widely. Beyond physiological markers such as HbA1c and BMI, studies explored various diabetes-related and psychological constructs, although often considering diabetes and disordered eating separately rather than as an integrated condition. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: This systematic review highlights the lack of a unified, evidence-based definition of T1DE, resulting in inconsistent screening, diagnostic and reporting practices. Establishing clear, consistent, evidence-based diagnostic criteria and screening questionnaires for T1DE is critical to improving early detection and developing targeted interventions. These findings provide a foundation for refining T1DE definitions as a stepping stone to an international consensus definition. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no. CRD420250223622 FUNDING: King's College London and King's College Hospital through the KMRT KCH Joint Research Committee studentship. This work was also conducted as part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR; CS-2017-17-023)-funded STEADY project (Safe management of people with Type 1 diabetes and EAting Disorders studY). NZ's salary was part-funded by the NIHR via the NIHR Clinician Scientist award to MS; JT and KI are part-funded by the NIHR Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London. MS was funded through her NIHR Clinician Scientist Fellowship (CS-2017-17-023).