ABSTRACT

The introduction of a “new” diagnostic category is not something that happens on a whim or in response to demand. It is the result of thorough analyses of available evidence from a range of sources, careful scrutiny and testing of proposed criteria, and is intended above all else to be clinically useful. The introduction of ARFID as a diagnosis followed the same process and had a similar aim. Research is therefore crucial to the performance of any diagnostic category in the real world. Diagnoses are dynamic entities; our understanding of ARFID, its definition and diagnostic criteria, seem likely to evolve over time as more data are gathered. This final chapter highlights potentially useful areas for further investigation, highlighting some current studies underway.