Internal consistency of measures for ICD-11 personality disorder severity and traits: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

A number of measures and scales have been developed for the ICD-11 personality disorder (PD) diagnosis, including severity and trait dimensions. The present systematic review and meta-analysis sought to evaluate the internal consistency of these measures across different populations and cultures. A systematic search was conducted across four databases where relevant studies were subjected to explicit eligibility criteria resulting in 49 included studies and 370 effect sizes. Study characteristics were tabulated, their methodological quality was evaluated, and findings were synthesized using random effects meta-analysis. Findings overall indicated that measures of ICD-11 PD severity and trait domains have adequate levels of internal consistency (α/ω = 0.82, 95% CI [0.81; 0.83], I2 = 97.3%). Aspects such as sample, country, language, format, and measured construct were significant sources of variation. Additional meta-analyses revealed that some measures performed better than others for certain dimensions. Internal consistency was overall supported across ICD-11 measures of severity and trait domains. Future research should further investigate the interrater reliability, test-retest reliability and stability, and alignment with interview-based PD diagnoses.

Self-Reported ICD-11 Personality Disorder Severity in Peruvian Adolescents: Structure, Validity, and Tentative Cutoffs.

Personality disorder (PD) is particularly common in adolescents, which underscores the significance of early screening, diagnosis, and intervention. To date, the definition of PD in the new ICD-11 has not yet been investigated in adolescents. This study therefore aimed to investigate the unidimensionality and criterion validity of self-reported ICD-11 PD features in Peruvian adolescents using the Personality Disorder Severity ICD-11 (PDS-ICD-11) scale. A total of 1,073 students (63% female; age range 12-16 years) were administered the PDS-ICD-11 scale along with criterion measures of personality pathology and symptom distress. The PDS-ICD-11 score showed adequate unidimensionality and conceptually meaningful associations with external criterion variables. The findings indicate that ICD-11 PD features, as measured with the PDS-ICD-11 scale, are structurally and conceptually sound when employed with adolescents. Norm-based cutoffs derived from the present study may be used for clinical interpretation. The PDS-ICD-11 may be employed as an efficient screening tool for personality dysfunction in adolescents.

Understanding the Interplay Between ICD-11 Complex PTSD and Personality Disorder Features in Relation to Traumatic Life Events in a Trauma-Exposed Community Sample.

In the ICD-11, PD and CPTSD overlap in impaired aspects of self- and interpersonal functioning, with implications for assessment and treatment. This article aimed to explore the relationship between CPTSD and PD features. A trauma-exposed community sample in Denmark (N = 470) completed the ITQ, PDS-ICD-11, and BTQ. Data were analyzed using exploratory structural equation modeling. Both two- and three-factor models were viable. In the two-factor model, both disturbances in self-organization (DSO) and PD items belonged to the same disturbed self-interpersonal functioning factor. Both factors predicted quality of life and functioning and were predicted by number of life events. In the three-factor model (PTSD, DSO, and PD), there was some overlap between DSO and PD items. Number of life events predicted belonging to the PTSD and DSO classes but not the PD class. The findings demonstrate clear overlapping and differentiating features. Multiple traumas and functioning in self-concept and relationships appear to differentiate.

Narcissistic personality disorder in the ICD-11: Severity and trait profiles of grandiosity and vulnerability.

Modern diagnostic and classification frameworks such as the ICD-11 and DSM-5-AMPD have adopted a dimensional approach to diagnosing personality disorder using a dual "severity" and "trait" model. As narcissistic personality has historically struggled to be adequately captured in dominant diagnostic systems, this study investigated the utility of the new ICD-11 framework in capturing diverse narcissistic expressions. Participants were mental health clinicians (N = 180, 67% female, age = 38.9), who completed ratings of ICD-11 personality severity, trait domains and a clinical reflection for two hypothetical case vignettes reflecting either prototypical "grandiose" or "vulnerable" narcissism. The majority of clinicians (82%) endorsed a diagnosis of personality disorder for both grandiose and vulnerable vignettes. Discriminant elements of personality impairment included rigid, unrealistically positive self-view, low empathy and high conflict with others for grandiosity, and incoherent identity, low self-esteem and hypervigilant, avoidant relations with others for vulnerability. Regarding trait profile, grandiose narcissism was predominately dissocial whereas vulnerable narcissism was primarily associated with negative affectivity and detachment. Qualitative responses highlight distinct clinical themes for each presentation. These findings suggest that clinicians using the ICD-11 framework are able to identify common core elements of personality dysfunction in grandiose and vulnerable narcissism while also recognizing their distinctive differences.

Schema therapy versus treatment as usual for outpatients with difficult-to-treat depression: study protocol for a parallel group randomized clinical trial (DEPRE-ST).

BACKGROUND: About one third of patients with depression are in a condition that can be termed as "difficult-to-treat". Some evidence suggests that difficult-to-treat depression is associated with a higher frequency of childhood trauma and comorbid personality disorders or accentuated features. However, the condition is understudied, and the effects of psychotherapy for difficult-to-treat depression are currently uncertain. The aim of this trial is to investigate the beneficial and harmful effects of 30 sessions of individual schema therapy versus treatment as usual for difficult-to-treat depression in the Danish secondary, public mental health sector. METHODS: In this randomized, multi-centre, parallel-group, superiority clinical trial, 129 outpatients with difficult-to-treat depression will be randomized (1:1) to 30 sessions of individual schema therapy or treatment as usual; in this context mainly group-based, short-term cognitive behaviour or psychodynamic therapy. The primary outcome is the change from baseline in depressive symptoms 12 months after randomization, measured on the observer-rated 6-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. The secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life assessed with the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 5 Level Version, functional impairment assessed with the Work and Social Adjustment Scale, psychological wellbeing assessed with the WHO-5 Well-being Index, and negative effects of treatment assessed with the Negative Effects Questionnaire. Exploratory outcomes are improvement on patient self-defined outcomes, personal recovery, anxiety symptoms, anger reactions, metacognitive beliefs about anger, and perseverative negative thinking. Outcomes will be assessed at 6, 12, and 24 months after randomization; the 12-month time-point being the primary time-point of interest. Outcome assessors performing the depression-rating, data managers, statisticians, the data safety and monitoring committee, and conclusion makers for the outcome article will be blinded to treatment allocation and results. To assess cost-effectiveness of the intervention, a health economic analysis will be performed. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence on the beneficial and harmful effects, as well as the cost-effectiveness of schema therapy versus treatment as usual for outpatients with difficult-to-treat depression. The results can potentially improve treatment for a large and understudied patient group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05833087. Registered on 15th April 2023 (approved without prompts for revision on 27th April 2023).

Transdiagnostic psychopathology in the light of robust single-trial event-related potentials.

Recent evidence indicates that event-related potentials (ERPs) as measured on the electroencephalogram (EEG) are more closely related to transdiagnostic, dimensional measures of psychopathology (TDP) than to diagnostic categories. A comprehensive examination of correlations between well-studied ERPs and measures of TDP is called for. In this study, we recruited 50 patients with emotional disorders undergoing 14 weeks of transdiagnostic group psychotherapy as well as 37 healthy comparison subjects (HC) matched in age and sex. HCs were assessed once and patients three times throughout treatment (N = 172 data sets) with a battery of well-studied ERPs and psychopathology measures consistent with the TDP framework The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP). ERPs were quantified using robust single-trial analysis (RSTA) methods and TDP correlations with linear regression models as implemented in the EEGLAB toolbox LIMO EEG. We found correlations at several levels of the HiTOP hierarchy. Among these, a reduced P3b was associated with the general p-factor. A reduced error-related negativity correlated strongly with worse symptomatology across the Internalizing spectrum. Increases in the correct-related negativity correlated with symptoms loading unto the Distress subfactor in the HiTOP. The Flanker N2 was related to specific symptoms of Intrusive Cognitions and Traumatic Re-experiencing and the mismatch negativity to maladaptive personality traits at the lowest levels of the HiTOP hierarchy. Our study highlights the advantages of RSTA methods and of using validated TDP constructs within a consistent framework. Future studies could utilize machine learning methods to predict TDP from a set of ERP features at the subject level.

Co-occurrence of borderline and schizotypal personality disorders: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The historical concept of borderline conditions refers to the pathology on the border between neurosis and psychosis. In DSM-III the conditions were divided into specific but also somewhat overlapping diagnostic criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and Schizotypal Personality Disorder (SPD). This phenomenological overlap, which results in co-occurrence of the two diagnoses, remains a clinical challenge to this day. METHODS: To address this issue we examined the co-occurrence of SPD and BPD according to the established DSM-IV/-5 diagnostic criteria. A literature search was conducted including studies that employed a structured interview with defined BPD and SPD criteria. RESULTS: Studies from 20 samples were included (i.e. 15 patients, 3 community and 2 forensic samples). For patients diagnosed primarily with BPD, 1-27% also met the criteria for SPD and for patients diagnosed primarily with SPD, 5 - 33% showed co-occurrence with BPD. In the forensic samples, co-occurrence for primary BPD was 10% and 67 - 82% for primary SPD. In the community samples, co-occurrence for primary BPD was 29% and 50% for primary SPD. The pattern of co-occurrence across community samples was particularly heterogeneous. CONCLUSION: The identified co-occurrences for BPD and SPD were considerably sample-dependent, and samples and measurements were generally too heterogeneous for a precise meta-analysis. Forensic and community samples generally showed higher co-occurrences, but these findings were characterized by potential methodological limitations.

Clinician-rated ICD-11 trait domains and personality disorder types.

The International Classification of Diseases (11th edition; ICD-11) has adopted a classification of personality disorders (PDs) that abolishes the established International Classification of Diseases (10th edition; ICD-10) PD types in favor of global severity and stylistic trait domain specifiers. The goal of the current study was to describe the empirical relationship between traditional PD types and the ICD-11 trait domains, which is anticipated to inform and guide clinicians in this profound transition. A total of 246 patients were rated by their clinicians. The Informant-Personality Inventory for ICD-11 was used to rate ICD-11 trait domains while PD types were assigned categorically according to ICD-10. Empirical associations were investigated by means of bivariate correlation and logistic regression analyses with bootstrapping. Results overall showed expected and conceptually meaningful associations between ICD-11 trait domains and categorical ICD-10 PD types, with only a few unexpected deviations. Findings suggest that ICD-11 trait domains capture stylistic features of the established PD types in a conceptually coherent manner. These findings may facilitate continuity and guide translation between categorical PD types (i.e., ICD-10 and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [fifth edition]) and the new ICD-11 classification in mental health care. Future research should seek to replicate these findings in various clinical settings while also integrating the essential PD severity classification. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Personality Disorder Severity ICD-11 (PDS-ICD-11) Clinician-Rating Form.

No clinician-rating tool has formally been developed to assess the ICD-11 model of personality disorder (PD) severity. We therefore developed and evaluated the 14-item personality disorder Severity ICD-11 (PDS-ICD-11) Clinician-Rating Form. A combined sample of 195 patients was rated by mental health professionals or clinical research assistants in New Zealand using the PDS-ICD-11 Clinician-Rating Form. Responses were subjected to item-response theory analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. In a subsample, we examined interrater reliability and convergence with self- and informant-reported measures of personality impairment, dysfunction in various psychopathology domains, and traditional PD symptoms. Item-response theory and confirmatory factor analyses supported the item functioning and unidimensionality, respectively, of the PDS-ICD-11 Clinician-Rating Form. The interrater reliability was very promising (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.94, p < 0.001). PDS-ICD-11 Clinician-Rating Form scores were associated with established measures of personality dysfunction at large effect sizes. This initial development study suggests that the PDS-ICD-11 Clinician-Rating Form constitutes a psychometrically sound instrument that provides a clinically based impression of the severity of personality dysfunction according to the official ICD-11 description. More research is needed to corroborate its validity and utility, and a structured interview is warranted for diagnostic purposes. The final PDS-ICD-11 Clinician-Rating Form is included as online supporting information.

Utility of the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) in predicting long-term sick-leave in Danish patients with emotional disorders.

BACKGROUND: The Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) is a self-administered measure designed to assess the level of inability to function socially as a consequence of a defined problem or disorder. METHODS: A total of 230 patients with emotional disorders completed the Danish translation of the WSAS, measures of anxiety and depression, the Level of Personality Functioning Brief Form, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Short Form, and the World Health Organization Five-Item Well-Being Index (WHO-5). We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis of the previously suggested factor structure of the instrument. We furthermore evaluated the construct validity of the WSAS by means of its relationship with depression, anxiety, personality functioning, and overall well-being. Finally, we evaluated the utility of the WSAS to identify those on long-term sick-leave by conducting receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: The instrument had a poor to average fit with the previously reported single-factor structure, but a better fit to a modified single-factor structure. Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega showed good internal scale reliability (α = .79, ωtotal = .85). WSAS was positively correlated with measures of anxiety (r = .33), depression (r = .44), and personality functioning (r = .23 and r = .20), and negatively correlated with WHO-5 wellbeing (r = -.57). The optimal cut-off point in the ROC-analyses was 23, which yielded a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 55% in the prediction of sick-leave status. DISCUSSION: The Danish WSAS shows promising psychometric properties, but has limited external validity insofar as predicting long-term sick leave in psychiatric patients with emotional disorders.

Affectivity in danish patients with emotional disorders: assessing the validity of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS).

BACKGROUND: The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) was designed to measure trait positive affect (PA) and trait negative affect (NA). METHODS: The Danish PANAS was administered to outpatients with depression and anxiety disorders. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega and factorial structure was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Convergent validity was evaluated by means of correlations with the negative affectivity and the detachment domain of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Short Form (PID-5-SF), the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale 6 (HARS-6) and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale 6 (HDRS-6). RESULTS: PANAS Scores of 256 patients were analyzed. Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega showed good internal consistency for both the PA score (alpha = .84 and omega = .89) and the NA score (alpha = .86 and omega = .90). CFA analysis confirmed a structure with two factors corresponding to the PA and NA factors. PA was negatively correlated with the detachment domain of PID-5 (r = -.47), HARS-6 (r = -.15) and HDRS-6 (r = -.37). NA was positively correlated with PID-5-SF negative affectivity domain (r = .43), HARS-6 (r = .51) and HDRS-6 (r = .52). DISCUSSION: The Danish PANAS has promising internal consistency and construct validity, which are comparable to other studies of the instrument.

ICD-11 personality disorder features in the danish general population: Cut-offs and prevalence rates for severity levels.

INTRODUCTION: Prevalence rates and correlates of personality disorders (PD) are relevant to health care policy and planning. OBJECTIVES: To present normative data for self-reported ICD-11 personality disorder (PD) features including tentative cut-off scores and prevalence rates for severity levels along with psychosocial correlates. METHODS: The Personality Disorder Severity ICD-11 (PDS-ICD-11) scale and criterion measures of impairment were administered to a social-demographically stratified sample of Danish citizens (N = 8,941) of which 3,044 delivered complete data. Item-Response Theory (IRT) was employed to indicate cut-offs based on standard deviations from the latent mean. RESULTS: The unidimensionality of the PDS-ICD-11 score was supported and IRT analysis suggested norm-based thresholds at latent severity levels. Expected associations with criterion measures were found. CONCLUSION: The normative data portray ICD-11 PD features in the general population and allow for interpretation of PDS-ICD-11 scores (e.g., scores of 12, 16, and 19 may indicate mild, moderate, and severe dysfunction), which may inform health care policy and planning. A total weighted prevalence of 6.9 % of the Danish general population is estimated to have clinically significant personality dysfunction, proportionally composed of Mild (4.8 %), Moderate (1.2 %), and Severe (0.9 %) levels. Future research should corroborate these findings using relevant clinical samples and methods.

Key insights from studies on the stability of personality disorders in different age groups.

While for decades, temporal stability has been conceived as a defining feature of personality disorders (PDs), cumulative findings appear to question the stability of PDs and PD symptoms over time. However, stability itself is a complex notion and findings are highly heterogenous. Building upon a literature search from a systematic review and meta-analysis, this narrative review aims to capture key findings in order to provide critical implications, both for clinical practice and future research. Taken together, this narrative review revealed that unlike previous assumptions, stability estimates in adolescence are comparable to stability estimates in adulthood and PDs and PD symptoms are not that stable. The extent of stability itself depends yet on various conceptual, methodological, environmental, and genetic factors. While findings were thus highly heterogenous, they all seem to converge in a notable trend towards symptomatic remission, except for high-risk-samples. This challenges the current understanding of PDs in terms of disorders and symptoms and argues instead in favor of the AMPD and ICD-11 reintroducing the idea of self and interpersonal functioning as the core feature of PDs.

Differential Diagnosis of ICD-11 Personality Disorder and Autism Spectrum Disorder in Adolescents.

The International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11) introduces fundamentally new diagnostic descriptions for personality disorder and autism spectrum disorder. Instead of the traditional categorical taxonomies, both personality disorder and autism spectrum disorder are described as being on a continuum. Accumulating research has pointed out that, in some cases, adolescents with autism spectrum disorder are at risk of being confused with having a personality disorder, which particularly applies to female adolescents. Case reports describe how adult autistic women struggled with social and identity roles as children and adolescents, using compensatory strategies such as social imitation and other types of camouflaging. Furthermore, some adolescents with autism display emotion dysregulation and self-injury. The ICD-11 recognizes that features of autism spectrum disorder may resemble features of personality disorder, but the two diagnoses have not yet been formally compared to one another. The present article therefore sought to outline and discuss the overlap and boundaries between the ICD-11 definitions of personality disorder and autism spectrum disorder and propose guiding principles that may assist practitioners in differential diagnosis with female adolescents. We specifically highlight how aspects of the self and interpersonal functioning along with emotional, cognitive, and behavioral manifestations may overlap across the two diagnoses. Restricted, repetitive, and inflexible patterns of behavior, interests, and activities are core features of autism spectrum disorder, which may be masked or less pronounced in female adolescents. Collecting a developmental history of the early presence or absence of autistic features is vital for a conclusive diagnosis, including features that are typically camouflaged in females. A number of future directions for research and clinical practice are proposed.

Cross-walking personality disorder types to ICD-11 trait domains: An overview of current findings.

The ICD-11 has adopted a classification of Personality Disorders (PD) that abolishes the established categorical PD types in favor of global severity classification with specification of individual trait domains. To facilitate and guide this profound transition, an overview of current research on empirical associations between established PD types and ICD-11 trait domains seems warranted. We identified a total of 9 relevant studies from 2018 to 2022, which were based on both clinical and community samples from U.S., China, Brazil, Denmark, Spain, Korea, and Canada. The patterns of associations with ICD-11 trait domains were systematically synthesized and portrayed for each PD type. Findings overall showed expected and conceptually meaningful associations between categorical PD types and ICD-11 trait domains, with only few deviations. Based on these findings, we propose a cross-walk for translating categorical PD types into ICD-11 trait domains. More research is needed in order to further guide continuity and translation between ICD-10 and ICD-11 PD classification in mental healthcare, including facet-level ICD-11 trait information. Moreover, the nine reviewed studies only relied on self-reported ICD-11 trait domains, which should be expanded with clinician-rated trait domains in future research. Finally, future research should also take ICD-11's essential PD severity classification into account.

Trait and symptom change in group cognitive behaviour therapy for anxiety and depression.

Personality traits underlying both anxiety disorders and depression are more malleable than previously presumed. This study examined associations between changes in personality traits (i.e. negative affectivity and detachment) and alleviation of anxiety and depression symptoms following cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). We hypothesized that decreases in negative affectivity would predict alleviation of depression and anxiety symptoms and decreases in detachment would predict decreases in depression and, to a lesser degree, anxiety symptoms. Data (N = 156) were collected in a randomized controlled trial comparing transdiagnostic and diagnosis-specific group CBT for patients with major depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder or agoraphobia. We assessed personality traits using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and symptoms with the Hopkins Symptom Checklist 25-item scale (SCL). Prediction was based on regression analyses. We found that decreases in negative affectivity predicted lower levels of depression and anxiety symptoms while decreases in detachment only predicted lower levels of depression symptoms. The findings substantiate current efforts to explicate the dynamic interplay between personality traits and symptoms and support the existing focus on targeting negative affectivity and detachment in therapy for anxiety disorders and depression. The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (ID NCT02954731).

Evaluation of a 36-item measure of ICD-11 and DSM-5 personality disorder trait domains and facets in Russian inpatients.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5) and International Classification of Diseases 11th revision (ICD-11) have introduced a new dimensional approach to personality disorder (PD) classification that relies on the global level of PD severity and individual expressions of personality dysfunction in terms of specified trait domains (i.e., negative affectivity, detachment, antagonism, disinhibition, anankastia, and psychoticism). This study sought to evaluate the psychometric qualities of the DSM-5 and ICD-11 trait domains and facets in 570 Russian psychiatric inpatients using the Modified 36-Item Personality Inventory for DSM-5 and ICD-11 Brief Form Plus-Modified (PID5BF + M). The expected six-factor structure of the DSM-5 and ICD-11 trait domains was replicated using exploratory factor analysis. The six domain scores showed expected convergence with normal five-factor model scores, and the 18 subfacets showed acceptable scale reliability. Our findings overall support the psychometric properties of the six PID5BF + M domain scores and 18 subfacet scores covering both the ICD-11 and the DSM-5 trait models. Consequently, clinicians and researchers in Russian-speaking mental health services are now able to perform a combined and facet-level assessment of the DSM-5 and ICD-11 trait models in a feasible and psychometrically sound manner. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

New Zealand (Aotearoa) clinicians' perspectives on the utility of the ICD-11 personality disorder diagnosis.

The ICD-11 has now taken effect and includes a new dimensional personality disorder (PD) diagnosis. The current study aimed to examine Aotearoa/New Zealand practitioners' perceptions of the clinical utility of the new PD system. A sample of 124 psychologists and psychiatrists completed a survey, applying the DSM-5 and ICD-11 PD diagnostic systems to a current patient, and completed clinical utility metrics on the DSM-5 and ICD-11 models. Additional open-ended questions further elicited clinicians' perceptions of the strengths, weaknesses and potential application issues of the ICD-11 PD diagnosis, and these responses were analysed through thematic analysis. Overall, the ICD-11 system was rated higher than the DSM-5 on all six clinical metrics, with no significant difference between psychologists' and psychiatrists' ratings. Five themes emerged: appreciation for an alternative to DSM-5, structural barriers preventing ICD-11 PD implementation, personal barriers to ICD-11 implementation, diagnoses viewed as low utility, clinician preference for formulation and cultural safety considerations for implementation of ICD-11 PD in Aotearoa/NZ. Overall, clinicians had positive opinions of the clinical utility of the ICD-11 PD diagnosis, although expressed some concerns about its implementation. The study expands upon initial evidence that mental health practitioners have generally positive perceptions of the ICD-11 PDs' clinical utility.