Clinical utility of the DSM-5 alternative model for borderline personality disorder: Differential diagnostic accuracy of the BFI, SCID-II-PQ, and PID-5

2018 ◽  
Vol 80 ◽  
pp. 97-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Christopher Fowler ◽  
Alok Madan ◽  
Jon G. Allen ◽  
Michelle Patriquin ◽  
Carla Sharp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Dsm 5

Diagnostic accuracy of DSM-5 borderline personality disorder criteria: Toward an optimized criteria set

2021 ◽  
Vol 279 ◽  
pp. 203-207
Author(s):  
J. Christopher Fowler ◽  
Marianne Carlson ◽  
William H. Orme ◽  
Jon G. Allen ◽  
John M. Oldham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Dsm 5

Interdiagnostician Reliability of the DSM-5 Section II and Section III Alternative Model Criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 721-S18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie C. Morey
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Mental Health Professionals ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
National Sample ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Diagnostic Reliability ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Dsm Iv

This study examined the interdiagnostician reliability and potential gender bias of the DSM-IV/DSM-5 Section II and DSM-5 Alternative Model definitions of borderline personality disorder. A national sample of 123 mental health professionals provided diagnostic judgments on 12 case vignettes selected to represent a range of personality pathology. Two versions of each case were included, one identified as male and the other as female, but which were otherwise identical. Analyses examined the intraclass correlation between clinicians and also examined rates of diagnostic assignments as a function of case gender. Reliability of diagnosis of borderline personality did not differ across the two diagnostic approaches, and concordance of diagnoses across the two systems was significant. The dimensional components of the DSM-5 Alternative Model demonstrated significantly more diagnostic reliability than the DSM-IV categorical diagnoses. The DSM-5 Alternative Model conceptualization of borderline personality can be diagnosed with comparable or greater reliability than the extant DSM-IV definition.

Complex PTSD – a better description for borderline personality disorder?

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 333-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jayashri Kulkarni
Keyword(s):  
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ◽  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Posttraumatic Stress ◽  
Stress Disorder ◽  
Diagnostic Category ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Complex Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Trauma Informed

Objective: To consider the use of the diagnostic category ‘complex posttraumatic stress disorder’ (c-PTSD) as detailed in the forthcoming ICD-11 classification system as a less stigmatising, more clinically useful term, instead of the current DSM-5 defined condition of ‘borderline personality disorder’ (BPD). Conclusions: Trauma, in its broadest definition, plays a key role in the development of both c-PTSD and BPD. Given this current lack of differentiation between these conditions, and the high stigma faced by people with BPD, it seems reasonable to consider using the diagnostic term ‘complex posttraumatic stress disorder’ to decrease stigma and provide a trauma-informed approach for BPD patients.

Utility of DSM-5 section III personality traits in differentiating borderline personality disorder from comparison groups

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
pp. 22-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Bach ◽  
M. Sellbom ◽  
S. Bo ◽  
E. Simonsen
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Multinomial Logistic Regression ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Emotional Lability ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Comparison Groups ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Matched Samples

AbstractObjectiveBorderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a highly prevalent diagnosis in mental health care and includes a heterogeneous constellation of symptoms. As the field of personality disorder (PD) research moves to emphasize dimensional traits in its operationalization, it is important to determine how the alternative DSM-5 Section III personality trait dimensions differentiates such features in BPD patients versus comparison groups. To date, no study has attempted such validation.MethodThe current study examined the utility of the DSM-5 trait dimensions in differentiating patients with the categorical DSM-IV/5 diagnosis of BPD (n = 101) from systematically matched samples of other PD patients (n = 101) and healthy controls (n = 101). This was investigated using one-way ANOVA and multinomial logistic regression analyses.ResultsResults indicated that Emotional Lability, Risk Taking, and Suspiciousness uniquely differentiated BPD patients from other PD patients, whereas Emotional Lability, Depressivity, and Suspiciousness uniquely differentiated BPD patients from healthy controls.ConclusionEmotional Lability is in particular a key BPD feature of the proposed Section III model, whereas Suspiciousness also augments essential BPD features. Provided that these findings are replicated cross-culturally in forthcoming research, a more parsimonious traits operationalization of BPD features is warranted.

scholarly journals Obsessive-Compulsive (Anankastic) Personality Disorder in the ICD-11: A Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julija Gecaite-Stonciene ◽  
Christine Lochner ◽  
Clara Marincowitz ◽  
Naomi A. Fineberg ◽  
Dan J. Stein
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Diagnostic Validity ◽  
Factorial Structure ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Dimensional Model ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Dsm 5

Introduction: With the shift from a categorical to a dimensional model, ICD-11 has made substantial changes to the diagnosis of personality disorders (PDs), including obsessive-compulsive (anankastic) personality disorder (OCPD). The ICD-11 PD model proposes a single diagnosis of PD with specifications regarding severity and domains. However, a systematic overview of ICD-11 anankastia is lacking. In this review we address the reformulation of the OCPD diagnosis in the ICD-11, and draw comparisons with the DSM-5, with a particular focus on diagnostic validity and clinical utility. We hypothesized that the ICD-11 PD model provides a diagnostically valid and clinically useful approach to OCPD, with specific emphasis on the anankastia domain as the primary trait qualifier.Methods: Literature published from 2010 to 2020 was systematically searched using the PubMed/MEDLINE, PsychInfo, Cochrane, and Web of Sciences search engines, in order to find all articles that addressed ICD-11 anankastia. Relevant articles were collated, and themes of these articles subsequently extracted.Results: Out of the 264 publications identified, 19 articles were included in this review. Four themes were identified, namely (a) overlap of DSM-5 OCPD with the ICD-11 PD model, (b) the factorial structure of the ICD-11 PD model with respect to the anankastia domain, (c) the clinical utility of the ICD-11 PD model, and (d) comparison of the ICD-11 PD model of anankastia with the DSM-5 alternative model for OCPD.Conclusions: The ICD-11 anankastia domain overlaps with DSM-5 OCPD traits, and the factor analyses of the ICD-11 PD model further support the diagnostic validity of this domain. There is some support for the clinical utility of the ICD-11 PD model of anankastia but further studies are needed, including of its relationship to obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document