Evidence Hub

Relationships of eating behaviors with psychopathology, brain maturation and genetic risk for obesity in an adolescent cohort study

Xinyang Yu, Zuo Zhang, M. Herle, T. Banaschewski, G. Barker, A. Bokde, H. Flor, Antoine Grigis et al.

Nature Mental Health, 2025

996 participants · 13 citations

Abstract

Unhealthy eating, a risk factor for eating disorders (EDs) and obesity, often coexists with emotional and behavioral problems; however, the underlying neurobiological mechanisms are poorly understood. Analyzing data from the longitudinal IMAGEN adolescent cohort, we investigated associations between eating behaviors, genetic predispositions for high body mass index (BMI) using polygenic scores (PGSs), and trajectories (ages 14–23 years) of ED-related psychopathology and brain maturation. Clustering analyses at age 23 years (N = 996) identified 3 eating groups: restrictive, emotional/uncontrolled and healthy eaters. BMI PGS, trajectories of ED symptoms, internalizing and externalizing problems, and brain maturation distinguished these groups. Decreasing volumes and thickness in several brain regions were less pronounced in restrictive and emotional/uncontrolled eaters. Smaller cerebellar volume reductions uniquely mediated the effects of BMI PGS on restrictive eating, whereas smaller volumetric reductions across multiple brain regions mediated the relationship between elevated externalizing problems and emotional/uncontrolled eating, independently of BMI. These findings shed light on distinct contributions of genetic risk, protracted brain maturation and behaviors in ED symptomatology. This study identifies distinct eating behavior profiles and links them to eating disorder symptoms, genetic predispositions for high body mass index and brain maturation during adolescence.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 996 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free