scholarly journals Assessing inter-model continuity between the Section II and Section III conceptualizations of borderline personality disorder in DSM–5.

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 290-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chloe M. Evans ◽  
Leonard J. Simms
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
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

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.

Borderline Personality Disorder and DSM-5

2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 143 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Oldham
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Dsm 5

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 Eating disorders among patients with borderline personality disorder: understanding the prevalence and psychopathology

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohsen Khosravi
Keyword(s):  
Eating Disorders ◽  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Eating Attitudes ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Anxiety And Depression ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Feeding And Eating Disorders ◽  
Eat 26 ◽  
Tas 20

Abstract Background: Treatment protocols can be bolstered and etiological and maintenance factors can be recognized more easily by a superior understanding of emotions and emotion regulation in the comorbidity of borderline personality disorder (BPD) and feeding and eating disorders (FEDs). Therefore, the present study aimed at investigating the prevalence and psychopathology of FEDs in patients with BPD.Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 220 participants were examined in three groups, namely BPD (n = 38), BPD+FEDs (n = 72), and the healthy control (n = 110), from August 2018 to November 2019. The participants were selected by systematic random sampling among the patients who referred to Baharan psychiatric hospital in Zahedan, Iran, with the sampling interval of 3. The subjects were evaluated by borderline personality inventory (BPI), structured clinical interview for DSM-5 personality disorders (SCID-5-PD), structured clinical interviews for DSM-5: research version (SCID-5-RV), the 26-item eating attitudes test (EAT-26), 20-item Toronto alexithymia scale (TAS-20), Beck anxiety disorder (BAI), and Beck depression inventory-II (BDI-II). Results: The results showed a 65.4% (n = 72) prevalence of FEDs in patients with BPD. Also, the highest and lowest prevalence rates were reported for “other specified feeding and eating disorders” (51.3%) and “bulimia nervosa” (6.9%), respectively. Although the highest mean score of TAS-20 was related to anorexia nervosa, there was no significant difference between the scores of various types of FEDs. The mediation analysis showed that anxiety and depression would play a mediating role in the relationship between alexithymia and eating-disordered behaviors. Conclusions: The results have suggested that alexithymia, anxiety, and depression should receive clinical attention as potential therapeutic targets in the comorbidity of BPD and FEDs. The clinical implications of the research have been conducted to date, and directions for future research have been discussed.

Convergence between DSM-5 Section II and Section III diagnostic criteria for borderline personality disorder

2013 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Sellbom ◽  
Randy A Sansone ◽  
Douglas A Songer ◽  
Jaime L Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Diagnostic Criteria ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Dsm 5

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
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document