Psychological distress in individuals with irritable bowel syndrome: the roles of body image and self-criticism

Figures & data

Figure 1. Hypothesized model.

Path analysis diagram depicting the hypothesized model, according to which IBS is associated with psychological distress, and body appreciation, body dissatisfaction, and self-criticism mediate this link.

Table 1. Sample demographics and group comparison.

Measure	IBS (N = 142)	Control (N = 365)	Total (N = 507)	F/χ^2
Age	31.9 (11.7)	26.2 (6.4)	27.8 (8.6)	17.3**
Gender Female Male Other	116 (82) 26 (18)	281 (77) 83 (23) 1 (0.3)	397 (78) 109 (22) 1 (0.2)	1.2
BMI	24.0 (5.2)	22.4 (3.6)	22.8 (4.2)	16.4**
Partnership status In a relationship Not in a relationship	86 (61) 56 (39)	239 (65) 126 (35)	325 (64) 182 (36)	1.1
Age at diagnosis	21.5 (11.2)	NAP		NAP
Age of symptom onset	18.5 (10.6)	NAP		NAP

Note: BMI = Body Mass Index, NAP = Not applicable, ** p < 0.01

Numbers are M(SD) or N(%). Tests are One-way ANOVA (F statistic) or the Chi-square test (χ² statistic).

Table 2. Pearson correlations between the main study variables.

	Depression	Anxiety	Body appreciation	Body dissatisfaction
Anxiety	0.72**
Body appreciation	−0.42**	−0.32**
Body dissatisfaction	0.25**	0.24**	−0.62**
Self-criticism	0.54**	0.54**	−0.46**	0.37**

** p < 0.01.

Table 3. Group comparison in the main study variables.

	IBS (N = 142)	Control (N = 365)	F(1, 505)
Depression	19.1 (6.1)	16.2 (4.9)	29.1**
Anxiety	15.5 (5.8)	14.3 (5.0)	5.4*
Body appreciation	3.2 (0.8)	3.7 (0.7)	34.6**
Body dissatisfaction	2.9 (0.9)	2.7 (0.8)	5.5*
Self-criticism	4.4 (1.0)	4.2 (0.8)	4.8*

* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.

Table 4. Correlations or differences between sample demographics the outcome variables.

Measure	Depression	Anxiety
Age	−0.11*	−0.14**
Gender Female Male	F = 11.0** 17.4 (5.4) 15.5 (5.1)	F = 21.0** 15.1 (5.2) 12.6 (4.6)
BMI	0.08	0.03
Partnership status In a relationship Not in a relationship	F = 9.8** 16.5 (5.0) 18.0 (6.0)	F = 1.9 14.4 (5.1) 15.0 (5.5)
Age at diagnosis	−0.12	−0.02
Age of symptom onset	−0.04	−0.02

Note: BMI = Body Mass Index, NAP = Not applicable, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.

Numbers are Pearson correlations or means (standard deviations).

Figure 2. Mediation model predicting depression. Numbers on the lines are standardized path coefficients. Numbers above the variables’ names are multiple squared correlations. While not presented on this graph, age, gender, and BMI were included as covariates in this model. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.

Path analysis diagram showing the results of the association between IBS and depression. The model depicts a direct link between IBS and depression, and two indirect paths with body appreciation and self-criticism as mediators of this link.

Figure 3. Mediation model predicting anxiety. Numbers on the lines are standardized path coefficients. Numbers above the variables’ names are multiple squared correlations. While not presented on this graph, age, gender, relationship status and BMI were included as covariates in this model. ** p < 0.01.

Path analysis diagram showing the results of the association between IBS and anxiety. The model depicts an indirect link between IBS and anxiety, with body appreciation and self-criticism as mediators of this link.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to restrictions, e.g. their containing information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.