Current issues in the classification of personality disorder

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Livesley
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder

ICD-11 and DSM-5 personality trait domains capture categorical personality disorders: Finding a common ground

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 425-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Bach ◽  
Martin Sellbom ◽  
Mathias Skjernov ◽  
Erik Simonsen
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Statistical Manual ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Domain Models

Objective: The five personality disorder trait domains in the proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition are comparable in terms of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism/Dissociality and Disinhibition. However, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model includes a separate domain of Anankastia, whereas the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition model includes an additional domain of Psychoticism. This study examined associations of International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition trait domains, simultaneously, with categorical personality disorders. Method: Psychiatric outpatients ( N = 226) were administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders Interview and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition trait domain scores were obtained using pertinent scoring algorithms for the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Associations between categorical personality disorders and trait domains were examined using correlation and multiple regression analyses. Results: Both the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition domain models showed relevant continuity with categorical personality disorders and captured a substantial amount of their information. As expected, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model was superior in capturing obsessive–compulsive personality disorder, whereas the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition model was superior in capturing schizotypal personality disorder. Conclusion: These preliminary findings suggest that little information is ‘lost’ in a transition to trait domain models and potentially adds to narrowing the gap between Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition and the proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model. Accordingly, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition domain models may be used to delineate one another as well as features of familiar categorical personality disorder types. A preliminary category-to-domain ‘cross walk’ is provided in the article.

Diagnosis and classification of personality disorders

2012 ◽  
pp. 855-860
Author(s):  
James Reich ◽  
Giovanni de Girolamo
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Assessment Methods ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Diagnosis And Classification ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Different Cultures

There has been considerable interest in the study of personality and personality disorder (PD) since early times and in many different cultures. This chapter covers definitions of personality disorders, ICD and DSM classifications of personality disorders, similarities and differences between ICD-10 and DSM-IV, recent changes in the conceptualization of DSM personality disorders, categorical versus dimensional styles of classification, and assessment methods for personality disorders.

scholarly journals Threading a pathway through the forest of mood and personality disorders

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-60
Author(s):  
Peter Tyrer
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
The Will

SUMMARYThe classification of mood and personality disorders has become unnecessarily complicated. It has become bogged down by well-meaning but unhelpful subcategories that puzzle the will of clinicians to make useful judgements. The answer is to think of bipolar, depressive and personality disorders as each constituting a spectrum of severity and not to be too preoccupied with individual labels. It would also be useful to avoid the diagnostic chimera of borderline personality disorder, a condition that defies proper classification.

scholarly journals Why we need to take personality disorder out of the doghouse

2019 ◽  
Vol 216 (2) ◽  
pp. 65-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Tyrer
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Interpersonal Relationships ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Dsm 5

SummaryThe diagnosis of personality disorder is sometimes tolerated but often reviled as a label to attach to people we do not like. This is hardly surprising when we consider that problems in interpersonal relationships constitute the main feature of the disorder. But we cannot escape the fact that personality problems are extremely common and rejection on grounds of perceived undesirability is doltish. Both the DSM-5 (2013) alternative model and new ICD-11 classification of personality may help understanding as they are more in tune with science. Most of the previous classifications have failed to help practitioners or patients.

The structure and development of borderline personality disorder: A proposed model

1997 ◽  
Vol 170 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Ryle
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Structural Model ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Proposed Model ◽  
Analytic Therapy ◽  
Cognitive Analytic Therapy ◽  
Different Levels

BackgroundThe theory of cognitive analytic therapy is extended to offer an understanding of borderline personality disorder (BPD).MethodA structural model (the multiple self states model) and a classification of different levels of developmental damage are proposed.ResultsThe model offers an explanation of the phenomenology of BPD.ConclusionsThe multiple self states model provides insights that will be useful for clinicians involved in the psychotherapy and management of BPD patients.

Classification of Personality Disorder

1979 ◽  
Vol 135 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Tyrer ◽  
John Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Interview Schedule ◽  
Personality Variables ◽  
Current Classification ◽  
Personality Disordered

SummaryAn interview schedule was used to record the personality traits of 130 psychiatric patients, 65 with a primary clinical diagnosis of personality disorder and 65 with other diagnoses. The results were analysed by factor analysis and three types of cluster analysis. Factor analysis showed a similar structure of personality variables in both groups of patients, supporting the notion that personality disorders differ only in degree from the personalities of other psychiatric patients. Cluster analysis revealed five discrete categories; sociopathic, passive-dependent, anankastic, schizoid and a non-personality-disordered group. Of all the personality-disordered patients 63 per cent fell into the passive-dependent or sociopathic category. The results suggest that the current classification of personality disorder could be simplified.

Personality Disorder According to the ICD 9 and DSM III and Their Value in Court Reporting

1986 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. J. Gayford ◽  
H. N. K. Jungalwalla
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Forensic Psychiatry ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Court Reporting ◽  
Personality Typology

The historical background to classification of personality is briefly reviewed. A more detailed comparative account is given of the ICD 9 (1978) and the DSM III (1980) typological classifications of personality disorders. Their value in court reporting is discussed. A critical evaluation is made of personality typology. The conclusion is that in spite of certain defects they are a useful method of transmitting information and of making prognostications in forensic psychiatry.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document