Purpose Since the term orthorexia nervosa (ON) was coined from the Greek (omicron rho theta omicron sigma, right and omicron rho epsilon xi iota sigma, appetite) in 1997 to describe an obsession with "correct" eating, it has been used worldwide without a consistent definition. Although multiple authors have proposed diagnostic criteria, and many theoretical papers have been published, no consensus definition of ON exists, empirical primary evidence is limited, and ON is not a standardized diagnosis. These gaps prevent research to identify risk and protective factors, pathophysiology, functional consequences, and evidence-based therapeutic treatments. The aims of the current study are to categorize the common observations and presentations of ON pathology among experts in the eating disorder field, propose tentative diagnostic criteria, and consider which DSM chapter and category would be most appropriate for ON should it be included. Methods 47 eating disorder researchers and multidisciplinary treatment specialists from 14 different countries across four continents completed a three-phase modified Delphi process, with 75% agreement determined as the threshold for a statement to be included in the final consensus document. In phase I, participants were asked via online survey to agree or disagree with 67 statements about ON in four categories: A-Definition, Clinical Aspects, Duration; B-Consequences; C-Onset; D-Exclusion Criteria, and comment on their rationale. Responses were used to modify the statements which were then provided to the same participants for phase II, a second round of feedback, again in online survey form. Responses to phase II were used to modify and improve the statements for phase III, in which statements that met the predetermined 75% of agreement threshold were provided for review and commentary by all participants. Results 27 statements met or exceeded the consensus threshold and were compiled into proposed diagnostic criteria for ON. Conclusions This is the first time a standardized definition of ON has been developed from a worldwide, multidisciplinary cohort of experts. It represents a summary of observations, clinical expertise, and research findings from a wide base of knowledge. It may be used as a base for diagnosis, treatment protocols, and further research to answer the open questions that remain, particularly the functional consequences of ON and how it might be prevented or identified and intervened upon in its early stages. Although the participants encompass many countries and disciplines, further research will be needed to determine if these diagnostic criteria are applicable to the experience of ON in geographic areas not represented in the current expert panel.

This book equips readers with the knowledge required to improve diagnosis and treatment and to implement integrated prevention programs in patients with eating and weight disorders, and will be of interest to all health professionals who work in the fields of psychiatry, and clinical psychology.

10th National Congress of the Italian Society for the Study of Eating Disorders (SISDCA) ‘‘The Clinical Competence in the treatment of Eating Disorders & Obesity (ED&O)’’ Rome, 9–11 March 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017 Scientific Commitee Lorenzo M Donini Ottavio Bosello Massimo Cuzzolaro Nazario Melchionda Umberto Nizzoli Giovanni Spera

Obesity is still defined on the basis of body mass index (BMI) and BMI in itself is generally accepted as a strong predictor of overall early mortality. However, an inverse association between BMI and mortality has been reported in patients with many disease states and in several clinical settings: hemodialysis, cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, stroke, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, surgery, etc. This unexpected phenomenon is usually called obesity-survival paradox (OP). The contiguous concepts of metabolically healthy obesity (MHO, a phenotype having BMI a parts per thousand yen 30 but not having any metabolic syndrome component and having a homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, HOMA, < 2.5) and metabolically obese normal weight (MONW, normal-weight individuals displaying obesity-related phenotypic characteristics) have received a great deal of attention in recent years. The interactions that link MHO, MONW and OP with body composition, fat distribution, aging and cardiorespiratory fitness are other crucial areas of research. The article is an introductory narrative overview of the origin and current use of the concepts of MHO, MONW and OP. These phenomena are very controversial and appear as a consequence of the frail current diagnostic definition of obesity based only on BMI. A new commonly established characterization and classification of obesities based on a number of variables is needed urgently.