The behavioral eating pattern assessment is a self-report instrument designed for use in the pre-contemplation and contemplation stages of behavior change. It identifies six primary behavioral eating patterns — Seeker, Soother, Drifter, Stabilizer, Fueling, and Social — based on the mechanisms that drive eating behavior rather than the content of what is eaten.
The framework is stage-matched to the Transtheoretical Model of behavior change. Assessment maps to contemplation. The 21-day calendar maps to preparation. The structured protocol maps to action. Coaching maps to maintenance and relapse prevention.
This is a behavioral instrument. It is not a clinical screener, a diagnostic tool, or a medical assessment. Its clinical ceiling is correctly scoped to first-contact stages-of-change identification.
Laini Byfield practices as a National Board Certified Health and Wellness Coach (NBC-HWC). This credential defines a specific and bounded scope.
Health coaching addresses behavioral patterns, habit formation, and the psychological and environmental drivers of health-related behavior. It operates within the client's own goals and values, not a clinician-defined treatment plan.
Health coaching is not medical care, psychotherapy, or nutrition counseling. It does not diagnose, treat, or prescribe. It does not replace the care of a physician, registered dietitian, licensed therapist, or eating disorder specialist. Where coaching and clinical care overlap in a client's life, they are complementary — not interchangeable.
The assessment generates a behavioral pattern code. That code determines which result copy, calendar, and protocol the respondent receives. The instrument uses a three-layer pre-screen architecture before reaching full scoring.
| Layer | Questions | Exit condition | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 — General pre-screen | Q1–3 | 2 or more neutral responses | NP — No Pattern |
| 2 — Seeker quick-screen | Q4–6 | 2 or more Seeker responses | S — Seeker (early exit) |
| 3 — Full assessment | Q7–35 | Normalized score comparison across S, O, D, T, G | Primary + secondary pattern code |
Normalization divides raw scores by question count per pattern before comparison, correcting for unequal question distribution across patterns. Current normalization denominators: S:19, O:19, D:22, T:18, G:18.
The No Pattern result presents no products and no coaching pathway. The only option offered is the full assessment. This is a clinical integrity boundary — NP respondents are not conversion targets.
NP Layer 1 answer codes are stored anonymously for population tracking. NP return rate — the proportion of NP respondents who complete Layer 3 — is tracked as a calibration signal for pre-screen sensitivity.
Four flag categories sit alongside primary pattern routing. Flags do not replace the pattern result — they modify the result copy and, in the clinical case, the product pathway.
Fires when timing deficit indicators reach threshold. Routes to Fueling-specific result copy emphasizing the distinction between deficit-driven eating and willpower failure. High-Output variant fires when F ≥ 3 and HO ≥ 2 simultaneously — athlete or high-output population with significant burn-intake gap.
Fires when biological female indicators and perimenopause symptom indicators reach threshold together. Result copy acknowledges hormonal context and recommends medical evaluation alongside behavioral work. Does not modify the product pathway.
Fires when responses suggest restriction cycling, compensatory behavior, or guilt-driven compensation at threshold. The C code appears in five question types: compensation drive, anxiety after eating, restriction impulse, caloric compensation after exercise, and guilt after relational eating.
Respondents who trigger the clinical flag receive result copy that names the flag directly, explains what it indicates, and recommends speaking with a qualified clinical professional before beginning a behavioral coaching program.
No product purchase pathway is presented to respondents with an active clinical flag. This is not configurable and is not subject to operator override.
A dedicated restriction cycling question was added to the clinical layer as the highest-priority gap for the bariatric use case. Restriction cycling presents identically to a Fueling pattern in behavioral self-report without explicit detection logic — the mechanism and clinical risk are distinct. This question separates intentional restriction with loss-of-control sequelae from accidental timing deficit.
A single neutrally worded compensatory behavior question modeled on established lay screening instruments. Fires into the C code. Routes to a clinical note in result copy rather than a product. Not a full eating disorder screen — a flag that identifies respondents who should connect with clinical support before self-directed behavioral work.
Three conditions trigger an escalation recommendation. Escalation operates at the assessment level and at the coaching engagement level.
Restriction cycling, compensatory behavior, or guilt-driven compensation at threshold. Result copy directs the respondent toward a physician or licensed mental health professional with eating disorder competency before beginning any self-directed behavioral program.
Result copy directs toward medical evaluation alongside behavioral work. Recommended referral category: physician or endocrinologist. The behavioral pattern work is not contraindicated — medical evaluation is recommended concurrently, not instead.
If a coaching client discloses behavior consistent with an active eating disorder, purging, or significant restriction not captured at intake, the coaching engagement does not continue until the client has connected with appropriate clinical support. Depending on the nature of the disclosure, coaching may resume alongside clinical care or may not be appropriate at that time. The determination is made in consultation with the client and, where relevant, the treating clinician. This is a non-negotiable clinical boundary within the NBC-HWC scope of practice.
The assessment collects anonymous behavioral pattern data — pattern codes, score distributions, flag frequencies — for ongoing framework validation. No personally identifiable information is retained at any stage of the assessment or result delivery.
Anonymous data fields collected: pattern code, primary and secondary pattern, normalized scores per pattern, flag status (fueling, clinical, perimenopause, high-output), investment level indicator, week of year (not exact timestamp), Layer 1 answer codes for NP exits, NP return flag.
The practitioner holds CITI Program certification in Human Research, Social and Behavioral Research track, under George Washington University requirements (Record ID 61975315). Anonymized aggregate data may be used for outcomes research and framework refinement consistent with the stated anonymous data collection posture.
Coaching clients who are referred by clinical partners are onboarded through Practice Better, which is HIPAA-compliant. No client data is shared with referring providers without explicit written patient consent.
If you are a physician, bariatric surgeon, GLP-1 prescriber, or mental health professional considering a referral arrangement, the following is relevant to that evaluation.
Referred patients complete the assessment independently. Results are delivered directly to the patient. With patient consent, a structured progress summary — pattern identified, intervention delivered, engagement markers, clinical flag status — can be returned to the referring provider.
The assessment does not share patient information with referring providers without explicit patient consent. All clinical communication uses Practice Better, which is HIPAA-compliant.
The behavioral pattern assessment identifies the specific mechanism driving eating behavior in referred patients. This complements medical management of obesity, GLP-1 therapy, and post-bariatric support by addressing the behavioral layer that medication and surgery do not reach. The assessment also screens for clinical presentations that warrant referral back to the clinical team — restriction cycling and compensatory behavior flags are reported in the structured progress summary with patient consent.
A one-page referral overview is available on request. · hello@lainibyfield.com · NPI Type 1: 171400000X