Reflections on clinical judgment and the dimensional–categorical distinction in the study of personality disorders: Comment on Bornstein (2019).

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 210-214
Author(s):  
Scott O. Lilienfeld
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Clinical Judgment

Factor Analysis of Measures of Articulation, Language, Auditory Processing, Reading-Spelling, and Maxillofacial Structure

1977 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-324
Author(s):  
Anita F. Johnson ◽  
Ralph L. Shelton ◽  
William B. Arndt ◽  
Montie L. Furr
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Auditory Processing

This study was concerned with the correspondence between the classification of measures by clinical judgment and by factor analysis. Forty-six measures were selected to assess language, auditory processing, reading-spelling, maxillofacial structure, articulation, and other processes. These were applied to 98 misarticulating eight- and nine-year-old children. Factors derived from the analysis corresponded well with categories the measures were selected to represent.

Debates in Dysphagia Management: How Do You Use Evidence-Based Practice in Your Dysphagia Patient Care?

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-123
Author(s):  
Jeri A. Logemann
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Method ◽  
Do So

Evidence-based practice requires astute clinicians to blend our best clinical judgment with the best available external evidence and the patient's own values and expectations. Sometimes, we value one more than another during clinical decision-making, though it is never wise to do so, and sometimes other factors that we are unaware of produce unanticipated clinical outcomes. Sometimes, we feel very strongly about one clinical method or another, and hopefully that belief is founded in evidence. Some beliefs, however, are not founded in evidence. The sound use of evidence is the best way to navigate the debates within our field of practice.

Tools & Resources: Impairment and Disability Web Sites

1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 5-6
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Interpersonal Relationships ◽  
Web Sites ◽  
Outpatient Psychotherapy ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Not Otherwise Specified ◽  
Cluster B Personality Disorders ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
And Behavior

Abstract Personality disorders are enduring patterns of inner experience and behavior that deviate markedly from those expected by the individual's culture; these inflexible and pervasive patterns reflect issues with cognition, affectivity, interpersonal functioning and impulse control, and lead to clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fourth Edition, defines two specific personality disorders, in addition to an eleventh condition, Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified. Cluster A personality disorders include paranoid, schizoid, and schizotypal personalities; of these, Paranoid Personality Disorder probably is most common in the legal arena. Cluster B personality disorders include antisocial, borderline, histrionic, and narcissistic personality. Such people may suffer from frantic efforts to avoid perceived abandonment, patterns of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships, an identity disturbance, and impulsivity. Legal issues that involve individuals with cluster B personality disorders often involve determination of causation of the person's problems, assessment of claims of harassment, and assessment of the person's fitness for employment. Cluster C personality disorders include avoidant, dependent, and obsessive-compulsive personality. Two case histories illustrate some of the complexities of assessing impairment in workers with personality disorders, including drug abuse, hospitalizations, and inpatient and outpatient psychotherapy.

Test-Retest Reliability of a Self-Report Questionnaire for DSM-IV and ICD-10 Personality Disorders

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Ottosson ◽  
Martin Grann ◽  
Gunnar Kullgren
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Anxiety Disorders ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Clinical Sample ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Anxiety State ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Axis I ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Summary: Short-term stability or test-retest reliability of self-reported personality traits is likely to be biased if the respondent is affected by a depressive or anxiety state. However, in some studies, DSM-oriented self-reported instruments have proved to be reasonably stable in the short term, regardless of co-occurring depressive or anxiety disorders. In the present study, we examined the short-term test-retest reliability of a new self-report questionnaire for personality disorder diagnosis (DIP-Q) on a clinical sample of 30 individuals, having either a depressive, an anxiety, or no axis-I disorder. Test-retest scorings from subjects with depressive disorders were mostly unstable, with a significant change in fulfilled criteria between entry and retest for three out of ten personality disorders: borderline, avoidant and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder. Scorings from subjects with anxiety disorders were unstable only for cluster C and dependent personality disorder items. In the absence of co-morbid depressive or anxiety disorders, mean dimensional scores of DIP-Q showed no significant differences between entry and retest. Overall, the effect from state on trait scorings was moderate, and it is concluded that test-retest reliability for DIP-Q is acceptable.

Factors of Impulsivity and Cluster B Personality Dimensions

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 203-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher M. Lootens ◽  
Christopher D. Robertson ◽  
John T. Mitchell ◽  
Nathan A. Kimbrel ◽  
Natalie E. Hundt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
The Other ◽  
Diagnostic Classification ◽  
Personality Dimensions ◽  
Cluster B Personality Disorders ◽  
Classification And Treatment

Abstract. The goal of the present investigation was to expand the literature on impulsivity and Cluster B personality disorders (PDs) by conceptualizing impulsivity in a multidimensional manner. Two separate undergraduate samples (n = 223; n = 204) completed measures of impulsivity and Cluster B dimensions. Impulsivity was indeed predictive of Cluster B dimensions and, importantly, each PD scale exhibited a unique impulsivity profile. Findings for borderline PD scores were highly consistent across samples and strongly and positively associated with urgency and lack of perseverance, as expected. Findings for the other PD dimensions also exhibited a fair amount of consistency. Implications of these findings for diagnostic classification and treatment are discussed.

Cognitive Treatment of Personality Disorders:: Difficult Clients or Difficult Process?

2003 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 657-660
Author(s):  
Lisa Wallner Samstag ◽  
J. Christopher Muran
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Cognitive Treatment

A Science of Personality Disorders?

1990 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 1164-1165
Author(s):  
Theodore Millon
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document