scholarly journals Case Report: Pathological Personality Traits Through the Lens of the ICD-11 Trait Qualifiers and the DSM-5 Section III Trait Model: Two Patients Illustrating the Clinical Utility of a Combined View

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Bastiaens ◽  
Dirk Smits ◽  
Laurence Claes
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Trait ◽  
Lower Order ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Everyday Clinical Practice ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Trait Model ◽  
Pathological Personality Traits

We report on two individuals presenting for treatment as part of everyday clinical practice, comparing their pathological personality traits through the lens of the ICD-11 trait qualifiers and the DSM-5 Section III personality trait model. We compare higher order pathological personality domains and lower order pathological personality trait facets of patient M (diagnosed with borderline personality traits according to DSM-5 Section II), and patient L (diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive personality traits according to DSM-5 Section II) with normative data and with each other. Findings highlight the clinical utility of a ICD-11/DSM-5 combined view, including: (1) the Disinhibition/Anankastia personality domain distinction as advocated in the ICD-11 model, (2) the Psychoticism personality domain as conceptualized in the DSM-5 Section III personality trait model, as well as (3) the use of lower order personality trait facets within each higher order personality domain.

scholarly journals Personality Inventory for DSM-5 in China: Evaluation of DSM-5 and ICD-11 Trait Structure and Continuity With Personality Disorder Types

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shulin Fang ◽  
Zirong Ouyang ◽  
Panwen Zhang ◽  
Jiayue He ◽  
Lejia Fan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Lower Order ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Clinical Patient ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Two Samples ◽  
Dsm Iv

The Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) is an established tool for assessing personality disorder (PD) traits that was developed based on section III of the DSM-5. It is composed of 220 items, organized into 25 facets, which are distributed among five domains. The psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the PID-5 remain to be demonstrated. Two samples were embodied in this study that included 3,550 undergraduates and 406 clinical patients. To probe the structure of the PID-5, parallel analyses were conducted to explore the unidimensionality of its 25 facets and a series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were carried out to confirm the 25 lower-order facets and their distribution among five higher-order domains. Then, the PID-5 was employed to measure the DSM-5 and ICD-11 trait models and to explore the relationship of DSM-IV categorical PDs with DSM-5 and ICD-11 personality traits. Correlation and regression analyses were conducted to probe how well DSM-IV categorical PDs correspond with maladaptive personality traits specified in the DSM-5 and five ICD-11 domains. The respective average internal reliability coefficients of the 25 facets obtained for undergraduate and clinical patient samples were 0.76 and 0.81, those obtained for the five DSM-5 domains were 0.89 and 0.91, and those obtained for the five ICD-11 domains were 0.87 and 0.89. Serial CFAs confirmed the rationality of the PID-5's lower-order 25-facet structure and higher-order five-domain structure in both samples. Correlation and regression analyses showed that DSM-5 specified traits explain the variance in PD presentation with a manifold stronger correlation (R2 = 0.24–0.44) than non-specified traits (R2 = 0.04–0.12). Overall, the PID-5 was shown to be a reliable, stable, and structurally valid assessment tool that captures pathological personality traits related to DSM-5 and ICD-11 PDs.

scholarly journals Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (9) ◽  
pp. 1879-1890 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. F. Krueger ◽  
J. Derringer ◽  
K. E. Markon ◽  
D. Watson ◽  
A. E. Skodol
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Trait ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Axis Ii ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Trait Model ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Personality Description

BackgroundDSM-IV-TR suggests that clinicians should assess clinically relevant personality traits that do not necessarily constitute a formal personality disorder (PD), and should note these traits on Axis II, but DSM-IV-TR does not provide a trait model to guide the clinician. Our goal was to provide a provisional trait model and a preliminary corresponding assessment instrument, in our roles as members of the DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Workgroup and workgroup advisors.MethodAn initial list of specific traits and domains (broader groups of traits) was derived from DSM-5 literature reviews and workgroup deliberations, with a focus on capturing maladaptive personality characteristics deemed clinically salient, including those related to the criteria for DSM-IV-TR PDs. The model and instrument were then developed iteratively using data from community samples of treatment-seeking participants. The analytic approach relied on tools of modern psychometrics (e.g. item response theory models).ResultsA total of 25 reliably measured core elements of personality description emerged that, together, delineate five broad domains of maladaptive personality variation: negative affect, detachment, antagonism, disinhibition, and psychoticism.ConclusionsWe developed a maladaptive personality trait model and corresponding instrument as a step on the path toward helping users of DSM-5 assess traits that may or may not constitute a formal PD. The inventory we developed is reprinted in its entirety in the Supplementary online material, with the goal of encouraging additional refinement and development by other investigators prior to the finalization of DSM-5. Continuing discussion should focus on various options for integrating personality traits into DSM-5.

Obsessive-compulsive and related disorders in DSM-5, ICD-11, and RDoC: Conceptual questions and practical solutions

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan J. Stein
Keyword(s):  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Work Groups ◽  
Integrative Approach ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Diagnostic Validity ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Dsm 5

Key nosological questions facing the DSM-5 and ICD-11 work groups on obsessive-compulsive and related disorders (OCRDs) included whether putative OCRDs should be classified together, and whether obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) should retain its classification as an anxiety disorder. Given that some of the putative OCRDs were new to the official nosologies, the work groups also had to grapple with the perennial questions of how to decide whether any condition is a mental disorder, and how to draw boundaries between disorder and normality. This chapter reviews some of the conceptual questions that emerged and some of the practical solutions that were suggested. The emphasis on both diagnostic validity and clinical utility is consistent with an integrative approach which holds that nosology should be both evidence-based and values-based.

DSM-5 Pathological Personality Traits and Intimate Partner Violence Among Male and Female College Students

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 416-437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily A. Dowgwillo ◽  
Kim S. Ménard ◽  
Robert F. Krueger ◽  
Aaron L. Pincus
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Relationship Violence ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Personality Facets ◽  
Pathological Personality Traits

The purpose of this study was to examine associations between pathological personality traits identified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed., DSM-5) Section III alternative model of personality disorder (using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5; PID-5) and intimate partner violence (IPV; using the Conflict Tactics Scale [CTS]) in a sample of male (N = 1,106) and female (N = 1,338) college students. In this sample, self and partner perpetration of CTS Relationship Violence and CTS Negotiation tactics loaded onto 2 separate factors. The PID-5 facets and domains were differentially associated with these factors for both men and women. Facets and domains explained 10.1%–16.1% and 5.8%–10.6% of the variance in CTS Relationship Violence tactics, respectively. For both genders, detachment was positively associated with relationship violence. Antagonism was uniquely associated with relationship violence for women, whereas disinhibition was uniquely associated with relationship violence for men. Associations with lower level pathological personality facets were also examined. Overall, results indicate that DSM-5 pathological personality traits are associated with IPV reported by both men and women.

scholarly journals Pathological Personality Traits (DSM-5), Risk Factors, and Mental Health

SAGE Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 215824401772512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanesa C. Góngora ◽  
Alejandro Castro Solano
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Pathological Personality Traits
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document