Age-Neutrality of a Brief Assessment of the Section III Alternative Model for Personality Disorders in Older Adults

Assessment ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 310-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inge Debast ◽  
Gina Rossi ◽  
S. P. J. van Alphen
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A ◽  
The Impact

The alternative model for personality disorders in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ( DSM-5) is considered an important step toward a possibly better conceptualization of personality pathology in older adulthood, by the introduction of levels of personality functioning (Criterion A) and trait dimensions (Criterion B). Our main aim was to examine age-neutrality of the Short Form of the Severity Indices of Personality Problems (SIPP-SF; Criterion A) and Personality Inventory for DSM-5–Brief Form (PID-5-BF; Criterion B). Differential item functioning (DIF) analyses and more specifically the impact on scale level through differential test functioning (DTF) analyses made clear that the SIPP-SF was more age-neutral (6% DIF, only one of four domains showed DTF) than the PID-5-BF (25% DIF, all four tested domains had DTF) in a community sample of older and younger adults. Age differences in convergent validity also point in the direction of differences in underlying constructs. Concurrent and criterion validity in geriatric psychiatry inpatients suggest that both the SIPP-SF scales measuring levels of personality functioning (especially self-functioning) and the PID-5-BF might be useful screening measures in older adults despite age-neutrality not being confirmed.

Relating DSM-5 section III personality traits to section II personality disorder diagnoses

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 647-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. C. Morey ◽  
K. T. Benson ◽  
A. E. Skodol
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Work Group ◽  
Taxonomic Structure ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A ◽  
Dsm Iv

BackgroundThe DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group formulated a hybrid dimensional/categorical model that represented personality disorders as combinations of core impairments in personality functioning with specific configurations of problematic personality traits. Specific clusters of traits were selected to serve as indicators for six DSM categorical diagnoses to be retained in this system – antisocial, avoidant, borderline, narcissistic, obsessive–compulsive and schizotypal personality disorders. The goal of the current study was to describe the empirical relationships between the DSM-5 section III pathological traits and DSM-IV/DSM-5 section II personality disorder diagnoses.MethodData were obtained from a sample of 337 clinicians, each of whom rated one of his or her patients on all aspects of the DSM-IV and DSM-5 proposed alternative model. Regression models were constructed to examine trait–disorder relationships, and the incremental validity of core personality dysfunctions (i.e. criterion A features for each disorder) was examined in combination with the specified trait clusters.ResultsFindings suggested that the trait assignments specified by the Work Group tended to be substantially associated with corresponding DSM-IV concepts, and the criterion A features provided additional diagnostic information in all but one instance.ConclusionsAlthough the DSM-5 section III alternative model provided a substantially different taxonomic structure for personality disorders, the associations between this new approach and the traditional personality disorder concepts in DSM-5 section II make it possible to render traditional personality disorder concepts using alternative model traits in combination with core impairments in personality functioning.

scholarly journals Personality functioning scale: A scale to assess DSM-5’s Criterion A personality disorders

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-53
Author(s):  
Juliana Beatriz Stover ◽  
Mercedes Fernández Liporace ◽  
Alejandro Castro Solano
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Check List ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Short Scale ◽  
Criterion A ◽  
Symptom Check List

The Section III on Emerging Measures and Models included in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, introduces a hybrid alternative approach, dimensional-categorical, to diagnose personality disorders. The Criterion A establishes the assessment of the impairment in personality functioning in terms of two dimensions: self and interpersonal. The present study was aimed at developing a short scale to measure both dimensions. The sample was composed of 342 adults from Buenos Aires city and its outskirts, with ages ranging from 19 to 82 years old (M = 39.90, SD = 13.75). Data were gathered using the Personality Functioning Scale, developed in this study, as well as the Personality Inventory for DSM‐5 Brief Form, the Mental Health Continuum Short Form, and the Symptom Check List-27. A principal components analysis conducted on 28 items found 2 factors, interpersonal and self. Internal consistency, estimated by ordinal Alphas, achieved values between .92 and .86 whilst Cronbach’s Alphas were .88 and .87. Significant and positive correlations between the Personality Functioning Scale scores on the one hand, and the Personality Inventory for DSM‐5 Brief Form scores and the Symptom Check List-27 score on the other, were found. Negative correlations between PFS scores and the Mental Health Continuum Short Form were calculated. As a result, a short scale with adequate psychometric features, suitable to assess Criterion A in adult Argentinian population has been developed.

The Inter-Rater Reliability and Validity of the Italian Translation of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders Module I and Module II: A Preliminary Report on Consecutively Admitted Psychotherapy Outpatients

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement C) ◽  
pp. 95-123
Author(s):  
Antonella Somma ◽  
Serena Borroni ◽  
Giulia Gialdi ◽  
Davide Carlotta ◽  
Laura Emanuela Giarolli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Clinical Interview ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Rater Reliability ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5

To evaluate the reliability and convergent validity of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (SCID-5-AMPD) Module I and Module II, 88 adult psychotherapy participants were administered the Italian translations of the SCID-5-AMPD Module I and Module II, Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form (LPFS-BF), Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Self Report (LPFS-SF), Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4+ (PDQ-4+), and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Personality Disorders (SCID-5-PD) relying on a Williams crossover design. SCID-5-AMPD Module I and Module II showed excellent inter-rater reliability. In terms of convergent validity, meaningful associations were observed between SCID-5-AMPD Module I scores and self-report measures of Criterion A; similarly, SCID-5-AMPD Module II trait scores were meaningfully related to PID-5 trait scores. As a whole, our preliminary findings supported the clinical utility of DSM-5 AMPD.

The latent structure of personality functioning: Investigating criterion a from the alternative model for personality disorders in DSM–5.

2015 ◽  
Vol 124 (3) ◽  
pp. 532-548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Zimmermann ◽  
Jan R. Böhnke ◽  
Rhea Eschstruth ◽  
Alessa Mathews ◽  
Kristin Wenzel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Latent Structure ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A

Assessment of Pathological Traits in DSM-5 Personality Disorders By the DAPP-BQ: How Do These Traits Relate to the Six Personality Disorder Types of the Alternative Model?

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Han Berghuis ◽  
Theo J. M. Ingenhoven ◽  
Paul T. van der Heijden ◽  
Gina M. P. Rossi ◽  
Chris K. W. Schotte
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Dimensional Assessment

The six personality disorder (PD) types in DSM-5 section III are intended to resemble their DSM-IV/DSM-5 section II PD counterparts, but are now described by the level of personality functioning (criterion A) and an assigned trait profile (criterion B). However, concerns have been raised about the validity of these PD types. The present study examined the continuity between the DSM-IV/DSM-5 section II PDs and the corresponding trait profiles of the six DSM-5 section III PDs in a sample of 350 Dutch psychiatric patients. Facets of the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology—Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ) were presumed as representations (proxies) of the DSM-5 section III traits. Correlational patterns between the DAPP-BQ and the six PDs were consistent with previous research between DAPP-BQ and DSM-IV PDs. Moreover, DAPP-BQ proxies were able to predict the six selected PDs. However, the assigned trait profile for each PD didn't fully match the corresponding PD.

An Empirical Evaluation of the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders in Later Life

2020 ◽  
pp. 009141502098076
Author(s):  
Lisa E. Stone ◽  
Daniel L. Segal
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Empirical Evaluation ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Pathological Personality Traits

Personality disorders (PDs) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ( DSM-5) are conceptualized as distinct clinical syndromes. However, debate persists about the clinical utility of this categorical model, with many researchers supporting a dimensional model that focuses on pathological personality traits and personality dysfunction. This model was published in Section III of DSM-5 and named the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD). This study evaluated the AMPD by examining relationships between traits and dysfunction with traditional categorical PD constructs among older adults. Older adults ( N = 202) completed the Personality Inventory for DSM-5, Levels of Personality Functioning Scale-Self-Report, and Coolidge Axis II Inventory. Results indicated that pathological personality traits do not relate to categorical PDs in directions predicted by the AMPD. Personality functioning related to categorical PDs in expected theoretical patterns according to the AMPD but lacked incremental validity above pathological personality traits. An implication of these findings is that the AMPD does not fully resolve the age-related issues with the traditional categorical PD model.

scholarly journals Interrater Reliability of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM–5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders Module i: Level of Personality Functioning Scale

2018 ◽  
Vol 100 (6) ◽  
pp. 630-641 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tore Buer Christensen ◽  
Muirne C. S. Paap ◽  
Marianne Arnesen ◽  
Karoline Koritzinsky ◽  
Tor-Erik Nysaeter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Clinical Interview ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5

scholarly journals A Psychometric Analysis of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders Module I (SCID-5-AMPD-I): Level of Personality Functioning Scale

Assessment ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 107319112096797
Author(s):  
Benjamin Hummelen ◽  
Johan Braeken ◽  
Tore Buer Christensen ◽  
Tor Erik Nysaeter ◽  
Sara Germans Selvik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Latent Variable ◽  
Latent Trait ◽  
Clinical Interview ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Level 2

The current study aims to examine the psychometric properties of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders Module I (SCID-5-AMPD-I) assessing the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS) in a heterogeneous sample of 282 nonpsychotic patients. Latent variable models were used to investigate the dimensionality of the LPFS. The results indicate that the LPFS, as assessed by the SCID-5-AMPD-I, can be considered as a unidimensional construct that can be measured reliably across a wide range of the latent trait. Threshold parameters for the 12 indicators of the LPFS increased gradually over the latent scale, indicating that the five LPFS levels were ordered as predicted by the model. In general, the increase of threshold parameters was relatively small for the shift from Level 2 to Level 3. A better distinction among the different severity levels might be obtained by fine-tuning the interview guidelines or the Level 2 indicators themselves.

scholarly journals Latent Profiles of Patients with Borderline Pathology Based on the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominick Gamache ◽  
Claudia Savard ◽  
Philippe Leclerc ◽  
Maude Payant ◽  
Alexandre Côté ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Latent Profile Analysis ◽  
Profile Analysis ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Optimal Solution ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Symptom List ◽  
Valid Criterion

Abstract Background There have been multiple attempts to try to parse out heterogeneity within borderline pathology by identifying patient subtypes; thus far, these works have yielded few consistent results. Recent developments in the operationalization of borderline pathology may provide new opportunities to identify clinically and conceptually meaningful subgroups of patients. The Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) offers a categorical-dimensional operationalization of Borderline personality disorder (BPD) that has yet to be tested for identification of patient subgroups. The purpose of the present study is to test whether the combination of the Criterion A elements (pertaining to level of severity) and the seven pathological traits from Criterion B that define BPD in the AMPD can yield meaningful patient profiles. Methods A total of 211 outpatients from a specialized PD treatment program (133 women, Mage = 33.66, SD = 10.97) were selected based on the presence of at least moderate borderline pathology according to cutoffs recently proposed for the Borderline Symptom List-23. Valid Criterion A (Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale) and B (Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Short Form) self-reports were administered to measure elements and traits that define BPD in the AMPD model; these variables were used as indicators in a Latent profile analysis (LPA). Results The optimal solution generated by LPA yielded four distinct profiles: (a) Borderline traits; (b) Low borderline pathology with Impulsivity; (c) Moderate borderline pathology with Identity problems and Depressivity; and (d) Severe borderline pathology. Clinically meaningful distinctions emerged between profiles on AMPD indicators and external variables relevant to PD, especially aggression and impulsivity. Conclusions Profiles reflected both the “severity” and “style” components imbedded within Criterion A and B of the AMPD, as they were mainly distinguished by a continuum of severity but also by some meaningful qualitative differences that may have important clinical implications for treatment planning and contracting. Results also suggest that the four Criterion A elements have independent value to identify important differences in patients with borderline pathology. They also highlight that some Criterion B traits that define BPD in the AMPD may be especially important to identify subgroups of patients, mainly Impulsivity and Depressivity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document