Commentary on “Next steps in use of the Eating Disorder Examination and related eating disorder assessments: a call for consensus” by Reilly et al.

The purpose of this Commentary is to expand upon Reilly et al. 2025's critique of the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) around a dialectic of its major strengths and its limitations. Although notable strengths of the EDE are its diagnostic case identification and detailed assessment of phenomenology, its resource intensity (training and administration) may explain why researchers and clinicians often prefer to use the EDE-Q—the self-report version of the EDE. An example of this is in the development of a national eating disorder assessment package for residential care in Australia, where the EDE-Q (not the EDE) was recommended by a committee of eating disorder experts advising the Federal Government, and subsequently the EDE-Q was used by researchers in the clinical evaluation of the first Australian residential program. The present and future need for multidimensional assessments beyond symptoms is presented. A proposal for a global consensus on harmonization of constructs in eating disorder assessment, matching a repertoire of relevant instruments suited to diverse times and places, is suggested.