Schedule for personality assessment from notes and documents (SPAN-DOC): Preliminary validation, links to the ICD-11 classification of personality disorder, and use in eating disorders

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Youl-Ri Kim ◽  
Peter Tyrer ◽  
Hong-Seock Lee ◽  
Sung-Gon Kim ◽  
Frances Connan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eating Disorders ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Assessment ◽  
Preliminary Validation

scholarly journals Establishing prevalence of diagnosis of personality disorder across high secure forensic services using the ICD 10 and ICD 11 classification

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S291-S291
Author(s):  
Anju Soni ◽  
Samrat Sengupta ◽  
Ian Treasaden
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Assessment ◽  
Negative Affectivity ◽  
Secondary Diagnosis ◽  
Clinical Validity ◽  
Paranoid Personality Disorder ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder

AimsThere has been an increasing recognition of the lack of clinical validity of different types of ICD10 personality disorder.The prevalence was established among patients in a high secure hospital in England of those with either a primary or secondary diagnosis of personality disorder and its recorded type according to ICD10 and then ICD11.The new ICD11 classification increased the validity of diagnosis of personality disorder as well as its severity.BackgroundICD 11 has proposed the dropping of the classification of personality disorder based on particular types of personality disorder and instead adopting a diathesis model based on 2 dimensions: presence of personality disorder and three levels of severity (Mild, Moderate and Severe) and the option of specifying one or more prominent trait domain qualifiers (Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Disinhibition, Dissociality, and Anankastia) and also specify a Borderline Pattern qualifier.MethodThe electronic medical records were used to establish the presence and type of personality disorder using the criteria of ICD10 and ICD11.The researchers assured reliability by rating some vignettes using the Schedule for Personality Assessment from Notes and Documents (SPAN-DOC) before rating actual cases.ResultFrom a total population of 208 patients, 64(30.8%) were classified as having either a primary or secondary diagnosis of personality disorder according to the ICD 10.30 (47%) had dissocial personality disorder (DSPD), 19(30%) emotionally unstable personality disorder (EUPD) and 8(13%) paranoid personality disorder. 20 (31%) had a comorbid diagnosis of mental illness and about a tenth had diagnoses of multiple personality disorders. These types of personality disorder diagnosed by the researchers using ICD 10 did not always match the types of personality disorder diagnosed by clinicians at the hospital.All patients met the criteria of personality disorder under ICD 11 but the number with a borderline specifier was greater than those with an ICD10 diagnosis of EUPD. Using the trait domain qualifiers in ICD 11, patients with ICD 10 diagnoses of EUPD or DSPD showed dissociation and disinhibition, with those with a DSPD showing low and those with EUPD high negative affectivity.ConclusionThe results confirm that while psychiatrists in a high secure hospital reliably diagnose the presence of a personality disorder, they are much less able to make an accurate diagnosis as to the actual type of personality disorder. The new ICD 11 classification will increase the clinical validity of the diagnosis of personality disorder and its severity.

Assessment of Borderline Personality Disorder Using the MMPI-2 and the Personality Assessment Inventory

Assessment ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia J. Bell-Pringle ◽  
James L. Pate ◽  
Robert C. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Discriminant Function ◽  
Personality Assessment ◽  
Female Student ◽  
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory ◽  
Personality Assessment Inventory ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Student Control

The usefulness of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and the. Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) in the classification of patients diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) was investigated. Twenty-two female inpatients diagnosed as having BPD and 22 female student control participants participated in the study. Those who scored 70 or above on the Borderline Features ( BOR) scale of the PAI were classified as BPD. For the MMPI-2, participants with profile configurations of 8-4-2, 8-2-4, 8-4-7, or 8-2-7 were classified as BPD. Eighty-two percent of the patients and 77% of the students were classified correctly using the PAI, whereas 9% of the patients and 95% of the students were classified correctly based on the MMPI-2. The discriminant function for the selected scales of the PAI classified 8G% of the participants correctly, and the discriminant function for the selected scales of the MMPI-2 classified 84% of the participants correctly. This suggests that both tests include items that discriminate between the two groups. Overall, the classification of participants based on the BOR scale of the PAI was more accurate than the classification of participants using the profile configurations of the MMPI-2. Implications for the assessment of BPD are discussed.

Diagnostic Concordance Between Categorical and Dimensional Instruments to Assess Personality Disorder in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 158-165
Author(s):  
Natalia Calvo ◽  
Naia Sáez-Francàs ◽  
Sergi Valero ◽  
Jesús Castro-Marrero ◽  
José Alegre Martín ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ◽  
Personality Assessment ◽  
Chronic Fatigue ◽  
Specific Pattern ◽  
Harm Avoidance ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Fatigue Syndrome ◽  
Self Transcendence

Abstract. The study examines the relationship between a categorical and a dimensional personality assessment instrument in patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). A total of 162 CFS patients were included in the study (91.4% women; mean age 47.5 years). All subjects completed the Spanish versions of the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4+ (PDQ-4+) and the Temperament and Character Inventory-Revised (TCI-R). Results: 78 (48.1%) of the patients presented a Personality Disorder (PD), the most frequent being Cluster C, specifically Obsessive-compulsive disorder, followed by Avoidant disorder. PDs showed a specific pattern of correlation with temperament scales. All PD clusters correlated positively with Harm Avoidance and Self-Transcendence, and negatively with Reward Dependence, Self-Directedness, and Cooperativeness. In a logistic regression analysis, Self-Directedness and Cooperativeness predicted PD presence. The findings are consistent with previous studies in non-CFS samples and suggest that the combination of the Temperament and Character dimensions (low Self-Directedness and Cooperativeness and high Harm Avoidance and Self-Transcendence) correlates with PD severity, and that Self-Directedness and Cooperativeness are associated with PD presence in CFS patients. The integration of these two perspectives expands the current comprehension of personality pathology in CFS patients.

The Classification of Eating Disorders

2010 ◽  
pp. 7-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn H. Gordon ◽  
Jill M. Holm-Denoma ◽  
Ross D. Crosby ◽  
Stephen A. Wonderlich
Keyword(s):  
Eating Disorders ◽  
Eating Disorder ◽  
Latent Class ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Statistical Manual ◽  
Text Revision ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Dsm Iv

The purpose of the chapter is to elucidate the key issues regarding the classification of eating disorders. To this end, a review of nosological research in the area of eating disorders is presented, with a particular focus on empirically based techniques such as taxometric and latent class analysis. This is followed by a section outlining areas of overlap between the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR; American Psychiatric Association, 2000) eating disorder categories and their symptoms. Next, eating disorder classification models that are alternatives to the DSM-IV-TR are described and critically examined in light of available empirical data. Finally, areas of controversy and considerations for change in next version of the DSM (i.e., the applicability of DSM criteria to minority groups, children, males; the question of whether clinical categories should be differentiated from research categories) are discussed.

Acetaminophen Reduces Distrust in Individuals With Borderline Personality Disorder Features

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian D. Roberts ◽  
Ian Krajbich ◽  
Jennifer S. Cheavens ◽  
John V. Campo ◽  
Baldwin M. Way
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Assessment ◽  
Personality Assessment Inventory ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Trust Game ◽  
Placebo Condition ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Adult Participants ◽  
Interpersonal Difficulties

People with borderline personality disorder (BPD) tend to distrust others. We hypothesized that acetaminophen might reduce distrust in people with high BPD features because disordered affective responses are partially responsible for the interpersonal difficulties of people with BPD features, and acetaminophen has been shown in multiple studies to reduce negative affect. Using a double-blind, parallel-arm design, 284 young adult participants were administered either acetaminophen (1,000 mg; acute) or placebo and subsequently completed an economic trust game. BPD features were assessed with the Personality Assessment Inventory–Borderline Features scale. Participants with elevated BPD features showed less trust in their partners in the placebo condition but increased trust in the acetaminophen condition. Acetaminophen did not change expectations of trustee’s trustworthiness and did not impact trusting behavior in participants low in BPD features. Our results indicate that acetaminophen may reduce the behavioral distrust exhibited at high levels of BPD features.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document