SCOFF (Eating Disorder Screen): Take It, Score It, Understand Your Results
The SCOFF Questionnaire is a brief, 5-item eating-disorder screening tool developed by Morgan, Reid, and Lacey at St George's Hospital Medical School in London and published in the BMJ in December 1999. The acronym maps to the key word in each question — Sick, Control, One stone, Fat, Food — so a clinician can recall and ask every item from memory in under a minute. Scoring is simple: one point per yes answer, and a total of 2 or more is a positive screen. SCOFF is widely used in primary care, emergency medicine, university health centers, and school health settings worldwide. A positive screen suggests the need for clinical evaluation, but the SCOFF cannot diagnose an eating disorder on its own. A negative SCOFF does not rule out an eating disorder either — if you have ongoing food-related concerns, talk to a clinician anyway. The NEDA Helpline (1-800-931-2237) is available if you need help finding care.
The 5 SCOFF questions: what each item asks
The SCOFF Questionnaire is built around a five-letter mnemonic — S, C, O, F, F — so a clinician can ask every item from memory in under a minute with no printed form. Each item is a yes/no question.
| Letter | Key word | What the item asks |
|---|---|---|
| S | Sick | Do you make yourself sick (vomit) because you feel uncomfortably full? |
| C | Control | Do you worry you have lost control over how much you eat? |
| O | One stone | Have you recently lost more than one stone (14 pounds or 6.35 kg) in a 3-month period? |
| F | Fat | Do you believe yourself to be fat when others say you are too thin? |
| F | Food | Would you say that food dominates your life? |
A note on the word “sick”
The first item is British English. Here, “sick” means “vomit” — not “ill”. North American sources, including the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, swap in “vomit” for clarity. If the wording feels odd, read it as “Do you make yourself vomit because you feel uncomfortably full?”
Why the items look this way
Four of the five items ask about behaviors or beliefs, not numbers. The one number — a stone in three months — is the 1999 UK paper’s wording. We keep it as historical item content, not as a Symptomatik suggestion.
How to score the SCOFF and what a positive screen means
Scoring is simple: each “yes” answer is worth one point, and the total ranges from 0 to 5. A score of 2 or more is a positive screen and indicates the need for further evaluation by a clinician.
A positive SCOFF is a flag, not a diagnosis.
Score interpretation
| Score | What it means | Suggested next step |
|---|---|---|
| 0–1 | Negative screen — does NOT rule out an eating disorder if you are concerned | If you have food-related concerns, talk to a clinician anyway |
| 2–3 | Positive screen — possible eating-disorder pattern | Schedule an evaluation with a clinician trained in eating disorders |
| 4–5 | Positive screen with multiple symptoms endorsed | Schedule soon; contact the NEDA Helpline if you need help finding care |
NICE NG69 states verbatim: “Do not use screening tools (for example, SCOFF) as the sole method to determine whether or not people have an eating disorder”. MDCalc echoes: “A positive screening result should lead to further evaluation to confirm an eating disorder diagnosis”. InsideOut frames it as raising a clinician’s “index of suspicion”.
A negative screen is not reassurance if you still have concerns. The Alliance for Eating Disorders is plain that a low SCOFF score paired with food-related worry is not a green light — it is still a reason to seek a professional opinion.
When to talk to a clinician — and how to start the conversation
A positive SCOFF is a strong reason to book a visit. So is a negative screen paired with ongoing worry. NICE NG69 verbatim: “If an eating disorder is suspected after an initial assessment, refer immediately to a community-based, age-appropriate eating disorder service for further assessment or treatment”.
Reasons to schedule an evaluation
- You scored 2 or more on the SCOFF — a positive screen calls for a clinician’s review, not self-diagnosis
- You scored 0 or 1 but still worry about food — a negative SCOFF does not rule out an eating disorder, especially binge-eating disorder or ARFID
- You have body symptoms with no clear cause — constipation, bloating, fluid retention, dizziness, fainting, dental problems, missed periods, or low energy
- Your mood, anxiety, sleep, or focus shifts around eating
- A family member, partner, or close friend has raised concern about your eating, body image, or weight
You do not have to lead with a self-diagnosis
The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health notes that “patients rarely self-identify as having eating disorders” — many show up with second-tier complaints like constipation, bloating, fluid retention, mood swings, or sleep and focus problems. You can just say, “I took a screening quiz online, and I’d like to talk about my eating.”
Helplines and crisis support (United States)
- NEDA Helpline: 1-800-931-2237 — National Eating Disorders Association phone support; information and treatment referrals
- NEDA Crisis Text Line: text “NEDA” to 741741 — 24/7 text-based crisis support
- Alliance for Eating Disorders Helpline: (866) 662-1235 — connects people with specialized providers
- 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline — call or text 988 for any active suicidal ideation
- 911 — for any life-threatening medical or psychiatric emergency
NEDA’s framing is worth holding onto: “lasting recovery is possible for all”.
How accurate is the SCOFF in the real world?
The SCOFF’s accuracy depends on where it is used, who is using it, and which eating disorder is being screened for. The table below compares the original 1999 validation with the 2022 USPSTF pooled review of adult primary-care use, both at the same ≥2 cutoff.
| Study | Sample / setting | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Morgan, Reid, Lacey 1999 (original) | 116 UK women aged 18–40 with AN or BN, plus 96 controls | 100% for AN and BN | 87.5% (false-positive rate 12.5%) |
| USPSTF 2022 (pooled adults) | Adults in primary-care studies | 84% (95% CI 74–90%) | 80% (95% CI 65–89%) |
The pooled 2022 numbers run lower than the 1999 figures. They are a more honest read of how SCOFF performs once it leaves a specialty clinic and enters everyday primary care. InsideOut reports a similar range: “Sensitivity of 50–100% and specificity of approx. 90% for Anorexia Nervosa and Bulimia Nervosa”.
Roughly one in five positive SCOFF screens in adult primary care are false positives. That is why SCOFF is a screening tool and not a diagnostic one. The original authors framed the 12.5% false-positive rate as “an acceptable trade-off for high sensitivity”.
What the SCOFF can miss: BED, ARFID, men, athletes, and more
SCOFF was built in 1999 to screen for anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa — the two eating disorders most recognized at the time. DSM-5 has since broadened the list, and SCOFF can miss conditions it was never built to detect.
Conditions SCOFF was not designed to catch
- Binge-eating disorder (BED) — the most common eating disorder in the U.S. It involves repeated loss-of-control eating without the purging or weight-loss patterns SCOFF items focus on
- Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID) — food restriction driven by sensory dislike, fear, or low interest in food, without the body-image features SCOFF asks about
- Other Specified Feeding or Eating Disorder (OSFED) — patterns that do not meet full criteria for AN, BN, or BED
- Pica and rumination disorder — added in DSM-5, outside SCOFF’s original scope
The Alliance for Eating Disorders is plain: SCOFF “predates DSM-5 expansion” and “these conditions may not be fully captured by SCOFF’s current framework”.
Who SCOFF was not tested in
SCOFF’s accuracy shifts in groups outside the 1999 UK sample of young women:
- Men — lower sensitivity; male eating-disorder patterns may differ from the items’ source
- Athletes — performance is “notably different”; exercise habits can mask the picture
- Adolescents — lower sensitivity than in adult women
- People with binge-eating disorder — performance is “notably different” because items lean on purging and restriction
- People from ethnic and cultural groups outside the 1999 UK sample — limited testing and possible cultural mismatch in how items read
Anyone can develop an eating disorder
MedlinePlus is plain: eating disorders are more often diagnosed in women and tend to start in adolescence or young adulthood, but “anyone can develop” them — regardless of age, gender, race, ethnicity, body size, or income. A negative SCOFF in a group the tool was not tested in is weak reassurance.
For a longer self-report covering eating attitudes more comprehensively, the EAT-26 is commonly used alongside SCOFF in research and treatment settings.
What the SCOFF is not: screening vs. diagnosis, and the role of a clinician
The most important thing to understand about the SCOFF is that it is a screening tool, not a diagnosis. Misreading a screen as a diagnosis — in either direction — can cause real harm.
What the guidelines say
NICE NG69 is verbatim: “Do not use screening tools (for example, SCOFF) as the sole method to determine whether or not people have an eating disorder”. NICE is just as plain about single numbers: “Do not use single measures such as BMI or duration of illness to determine whether to offer treatment for an eating disorder”. A score on a quiz, or a number on a scale, is never enough on its own.
What a clinician adds that a screen cannot
A clinician trained in eating disorders typically:
- Runs a structured DSM-5 interview
- Checks medical history and signs (heart changes, electrolytes, dental problems, missed periods)
- Screens for depression, anxiety, and substance use
- Refers you to a team that may include therapy, medical monitoring, nutrition support, and medication when needed
NICE recommends “refer immediately to a community-based, age-appropriate eating disorder service” once an eating disorder is suspected. NIMH adds that eating disorders “can be treated successfully” with early detection.
The Alliance for Eating Disorders frames the other side: “Negative results do not eliminate eating disorder risk; even those with low SCOFF scores but food-related concerns should seek professional help”. A negative score should open the conversation, not close it.
Frequently asked questions
Where can I get the official SCOFF questionnaire?
The SCOFF was published in the BMJ in 1999 by Morgan, Reid, and Lacey and is widely reproduced by the Alliance for Eating Disorders, MDCalc, and InsideOut Institute. The paper is archived in PubMed Central (PMC1070794).
Who created the SCOFF questionnaire?
The SCOFF was developed by J F Morgan, F Reid, and J H Lacey at the Department of Psychiatry, St George’s Hospital Medical School in London, and published in the BMJ on 4 December 1999. The acronym was designed so primary-care clinicians could recall the items from memory without a printed form.
What age range is the SCOFF for?
The original validation enrolled women aged 18–40, and SCOFF is most established as an adult instrument. Sensitivity is lower in adolescents and in male populations.
What does each letter of SCOFF stand for?
S stands for Sick (British wording for vomiting), C for Control, O for One stone (the British weight unit, roughly 14 pounds or 6.35 kg), F for Fat, and F for Food.
Why does the SCOFF only have 5 questions?
The SCOFF was designed for ease of recall and quick use in primary care, where longer instruments like the Eating Disorder Inventory or BITE were too time-consuming for routine use.
What if I scored 2 or more but feel like nothing is wrong?
A positive SCOFF warrants an evaluation with a clinician trained in eating disorders, even if the score does not feel like it matches your experience. The clinician determines whether the pattern reflects an eating disorder or is better explained by something else.
What if I scored 0 or 1 but still feel worried about my eating?
A negative SCOFF does not rule out an eating disorder, especially binge-eating disorder, ARFID, OSFED, and atypical presentations SCOFF was not designed to catch. The Alliance states explicitly that low SCOFF scores with food-related concerns still warrant professional evaluation.