Table 1.
Results of the weighted ANOVAs for the influence of categorical variables on the effect sizes
| Moderator variable | k | r+ | 95% CI | ANOVA results | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| rl | ru | ||||
| Geographic location | QB(1) = 0.051, p = .821 | ||||
| USA | 18 | .363 | .274 | .445 | R2 = .00 |
| Other countries | 18 | .349 | .270 | .424 | QW(34) = 195.879, p < .001 |
| Sample setting | |||||
| Gymnasiums | 18 | .359 | .284 | .430 | QB(5) = 31.793, p < .001 |
| University | 9 | .301 | .169 | .423 | R2 = .18 |
| Area metropolitan | 3 | .352 | .276 | .425 | QW(30) = 153.370, p < .001 |
| AAS users | 1 | .710 | .609 | .788 | |
| Clinical (BDD or EDS) | 2 | .272 | .055 | .464 | |
| University and other | 3 | .387 | .240 | .516 | |
| Sample setting | QB(1) = 30.137, p < .001 | ||||
| AAS users | 1 | .710 | .609 | .788 | R2 = .26 |
| Other | 35 | .342 | .287 | .394 | QW(34) = 167.137, p < .001 |
| MD measurement | |||||
| MDDI | 12 | .396 | .278 | .503 | QB(7) = 17.087, p = .017 |
| MASS | 7 | .367 | .220 | .497 | R2 = .00 |
| SCID | 3 | .285 | .031 | .504 | QW(28) = 171.339, p < .001 |
| ACQ | 4 | .398 | .320 | .471 | |
| MDS | 1 | .135 | .017 | .249 | |
| MDI | 6 | .293 | .185 | .394 | |
| MDQ | 1 | .363 | .219 | .491 | |
| MDSQ | 2 | .386 | −.012 | .678 | |
| Type of MD measurement | QB(1) = 0.385, p = .535 | ||||
| Diagnostic | 3 | .285 | .031 | .504 | R2 = .00 |
| Symptomatology | 33 | +.361 | .301 | .419 | QW(34) = 202.228, p < .001 |
| ED measurementa | |||||
| EAT | 14 | .345 | .263 | .423 | QB(6) = 30.585, p < .001 |
| EDI | 10 | .348 | .268 | .423 | R2 = .23 |
| EDE-Q | 7 | .348 | .187 | .491 | QW(30) = 141.207, p < .001 |
| EDE-Q Modified | 2 | .642 | .449 | .777 | |
| SCID | 2 | .177 | −.036 | .374 | |
| MEBBIE | 1 | .135 | .017 | .249 | |
| CHAA | 1 | .447 | .367 | .521 | |
| EDQ Modified vs. othersa | QB(1) = 8.087, p = .007 | ||||
| EDE-Q Modified | 2 | .642 | .449 | .777 | R2 = .26 |
| Others | 35 | .336 | .281 | .389 | QW(35) = 167.335, p < .001 |
| Type of ED measurementa | QB(1) = 3.129, p = .077 | ||||
| Diagnostic | 2 | .177 | −.036 | .374 | R2 = .01 |
| Symptomatology | 35 | .364 | .305 | .419 | QW(35) = 200.840, p < .001 |
| Statistics reported | QB(1) = 2.274, p = .132 | ||||
| Correlation coefficient | 32 | .368 | .308 | .426 | R2 = .03 |
| Odds ratio | 4 | .242 | .078 | .393 | QW(34) = 189.439, p < .001 |
Note. k: number of studies. r+: mean effect size. rl and ru: 95% lower and upper confidence limits around r+; QB: between-categories Q statistic; QW: within-categories Q statistic; R2: proportion of variance accounted for by the moderator variable; ED: eating disorder; EDE-Q: Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire; MEBBIE: Male Eating Behavior and Body Image Evaluation; CHAA: Cuestionario de Hábitos de Alimentación Alterados; SCID: structured clinical Interview for DSM-IV; MDDI: Muscle Dysmorphic Disorder Inventory; MASS: Muscle Appearance Satisfaction Scale; MDI: Muscle Dysmorphia Inventory; AAS: anabolic androgenic steroid; ACQ: Adonis Complex Questionnaire; MDSQ: Muscle Dysmorphia Symptom Questionnaire; MDQ: Muscle Dysmorphia Questionnaire; CI: confidence interval; ANOVA: analysis of variance; BDD: body dysmorphic disorder.
aHughes et al.’s (2016) study used two tools for assessing EDs (EAT-26 and EDEQ).