Exploring the predictive validity of personality disorder criteria.

We tested the predictive validity of personality disorder (PD) indicators at different levels of aggregation, ranging from general PD severity to PD syndrome scales to individual PD criteria. We compared the predictive validity of models on these levels based on interview data on all 78 DSM-IV PD criteria, by using 19 outcome scales in three different samples (N = 651, N = 552, and N = 1,277). We hypothesized that criteria of personality pathology yield a significant increase in predictive validity compared with scales that are aggregated at the syndrome- or general severity-level. We assessed out of sample performance of predictive models in a repeated cross-validation design using regularized linear regression and regression forest algorithms. We observed no significant difference in predictive performance between models trained at the item-level and models trained on scale-level data. We further tested the predictive performance of the trained linear models across samples on outcome measures shared between samples and inspected models for criteria-level information they relied on to make predictions. Our results suggest that little predictive variance is lost when interview items assessing DSM-IV PD criteria are aggregated to dimensional PD scales. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The Incremental Utility of Criteria A and B of the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders for Predicting DSM-IV/DSM-5 Section II Personality Disorders.

The DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) includes two main criteria: moderate or greater impairment in personality functioning (Criterion A) and the presence of one or more pathological personality traits (Criterion B). The aim of the study was to investigate the incremental utility of Criteria A and B for predicting DSM-5 Section II personality disorders (PD). The sample (N = 317) consisted of three well-defined groups: non-clinical participants (n = 35), psychiatric patients with PD (n = 193), and without PD (n = 83). All were assessed using the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders Module I (SCID-5-AMPD-I): Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS), and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Logistic regression analyses showed that the SCID-5-AMPD-I could predict the presence of PDs in general, and the three specific PDs that were investigated (i.e., Antisocial, Borderline, and Avoidant PDs). The PID-5 domains enhanced prediction of the specific PDs, but not the presence of PDs in general, when entered in the second step. Our results support the AMPD model: Criterion A predicted the presence of DSM-5 Section II PDs in general, whereas measures of Criterion B incremented prediction of Antisocial, Borderline, and Avoidant PDs.

Borderline personality disorder symptom networks across adolescent and adult clinical samples: examining symptom centrality and replicability.

BACKGROUND: Numerous theories posit different core features to borderline personality disorder (BPD). Recent advances in network analysis provide a method of examining the relative centrality of BPD symptoms, as well as examine the replicability of findings across samples. Additionally, despite the increase in research supporting the validity of BPD in adolescents, clinicians are reluctant to diagnose BPD in adolescents. Establishing the replicability of the syndrome across adolescents and adults informs clinical practice and research. This study examined the stability of BPD symptom networks and centrality of symptoms across samples varying in age and clinical characteristics. METHODS: Cross-sectional analyses of BPD symptoms from semi-structured diagnostic interviews from the Collaborative Longitudinal Study of Personality Disorders (CLPS), the Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Service (MIDAS) study, and an adolescent clinical sample. Network attributes, including edge (partial association) strength and node (symptom) expected influence, were compared. RESULTS: The three networks were largely similar and strongly correlated. Affective instability and identity disturbance emerged as relatively central symptoms across the three samples, and relationship difficulties across adult networks. Differences in network attributes were more evident between networks varying both in age and in BPD symptom severity level. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the relative importance of affective, identity, and relationship symptoms, consistent with several leading theories of BPD. The network structure of BPD symptoms appears generally replicable across multiple large samples including adolescents and adults, providing further support for the validity of the diagnosis across these developmental phases.

The prognostic utility of personality traits versus past psychiatric diagnoses: Predicting future mental health and functioning.

Past psychiatric diagnoses are central to patient case formulation and prognosis. Recently, alternative classification models such as the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) proposed to assess traits to predict clinically-relevant outcomes. The current study directly compared personality traits and past diagnoses as predictors of future mental health and functioning in three independent, prospective samples. Regression analyses found that personality traits significantly predicted future first onsets of psychiatric disorders (ΔR2=06-.15), symptom chronicity (ΔR2=.03-.06), and functioning (ΔR2=.02-.07), beyond past and current psychiatric diagnoses. Conversely, past psychiatric diagnoses did not provide an incremental prediction of outcomes when personality traits and other concurrent predictors were already included in the model. Overall, personality traits predicted a variety of outcomes in diverse settings, beyond diagnoses. Past diagnoses were generally not informative about future outcomes when personality was considered. Together, these findings support the added value of personality traits assessment in case formulation, consistent with HiTOP model.

Criterion A: Level of personality functioning in the alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders.

Criterion A, as represented by Level of Personality Functioning (LPF), offers a means by which to conceptualize the core impairment in self and interpersonal functioning that distinguishes personality disorder (PD) from other forms of psychopathology. One of the most widely cited criticisms of the current Section II in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition categorical diagnostic system is the high level of comorbidity among the categorical PD diagnoses. The Section III alternative Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition model for PDs (AMPD) addresses this problem by assessing the commonalities of the PDs using a single severity continuum, represented in the AMPD by the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS), which comprises both self and interpersonal pathology. Since its initial introduction, the LPFS has generated an expansive literature base and has also seen significant advancements in its measurement, including both semistructured and self-report methods. Such studies have generally demonstrated that the LPFS can be rated reliably, across both experienced and inexperienced raters, and demonstrates strong validity as evidenced by associations with relevant criterion variables and demonstrations of predictive and clinical utility. This review offers a brief history of the conceptualization and development of Criterion A and the LPFS, describes the major advancements in its measurement, and provides a summary of the status of the empirical literature regarding Criterion A's structure, reliability, and validity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) in psychiatric practice and research.

The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) has emerged out of the quantitative approach to psychiatric nosology. This approach identifies psychopathology constructs based on patterns of co-variation among signs and symptoms. The initial HiTOP model, which was published in 2017, is based on a large literature that spans decades of research. HiTOP is a living model that undergoes revision as new data become available. Here we discuss advantages and practical considerations of using this system in psychiatric practice and research. We especially highlight limitations of HiTOP and ongoing efforts to address them. We describe differences and similarities between HiTOP and existing diagnostic systems. Next, we review the types of evidence that informed development of HiTOP, including populations in which it has been studied and data on its validity. The paper also describes how HiTOP can facilitate research on genetic and environmental causes of psychopathology as well as the search for neurobiologic mechanisms and novel treatments. Furthermore, we consider implications for public health programs and prevention of mental disorders. We also review data on clinical utility and illustrate clinical application of HiTOP. Importantly, the model is based on measures and practices that are already used widely in clinical settings. HiTOP offers a way to organize and formalize these techniques. This model already can contribute to progress in psychiatry and complement traditional nosologies. Moreover, HiTOP seeks to facilitate research on linkages between phenotypes and biological processes, which may enable construction of a system that encompasses both biomarkers and precise clinical description.

A Comparison of Two Five-Factor Model Operationalizations of the Triarchic Model of Psychopathy in a Clinical Sample.

Structural models of personality traits, particularly the five-factor model (FFM), continue to inform ongoing debates regarding what personality attributes and trait domains are central to psychopathy. A growing body of literature has linked the constructs of the triarchic model of psychopathy (boldness, meanness, disinhibition) to the FFM. Recently, researchers developed both item and regression-based measures of the triarchic model of psychopathy using the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised-a popular measure of the FFM. The current study examines the correlates of these two FFM-derived operationalizations of the triarchic model using data from the Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study. The two approaches had strong convergent validity coefficients and similar patterns of criterion-related validity coefficients. Meanness related to greater personality pathology characterized by exploitation of others and poor attachment, whereas disinhibition related to indicators of greater negative affect and poor behavioral constraint. Boldness related to reduced negative affect and greater narcissistic personality traits. Although the item and regression-based approaches showed similar patterns of associations with criterion-variables, the item-based approach has some practical and psychometric advantages over the regression-based approach given strong correlations between the meanness and disinhibition scores from the regression approach.

Association of Borderline Personality Disorder Criteria With Suicide Attempts: Findings From the Collaborative Longitudinal Study of Personality Disorders Over 10 Years of Follow-up.

Importance: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) has been identified as a strong risk factor for suicidal behavior, including suicide attempts. Delineating specific features that increase risk could inform interventions. Objective: To examine factors associated with prospectively observed suicide attempts among participants in the Collaborative Longitudinal Study of Personality Disorders (CLPS), over 10 years of follow-up, with a focus on BPD and BPD criteria. Design, Setting, and Participants: The CLPS is a multisite, naturalistic, prospective study of adult participants with 4 personality disorders (PDs) and a comparison group of adults with major depressive disorder and minimal PD features. Participants were all treatment-seeking and recruited from inpatient, partial, and outpatient treatment settings across New York, New York, Boston, Massachusetts, New Haven, Connecticut, and Providence, Rhode Island. A total of 733 participants were recruited at baseline, with 701 completing at least 1 follow-up assessment. The cohorts were recruited from September 1996 through April 1998 and September 2001 through August 2002. Data for this study using this follow-up sample (N = 701) were analyzed between March 2019 and August 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participants were assessed annually using semistructured diagnostic interviews and a variety of self-report measures for up to 10 years. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to examine baseline demographic and clinical risk factors, including BPD and individual BPD criteria, of suicide attempt assessed over 10 years of prospective follow-up. Results: Of the 701 participants, 447 (64%) identified as female, 488 (70%) as White, 527 (75%) as single, 433 (62%) were unemployed, and 512 (73%) reported at least some college education. Of all disorders, BPD emerged as the most robust factor associated with prospectively observed suicide attempt(s) (odds ratio [OR], 4.18; 95% CI, 2.68-6.52), even after controlling for significant demographic (sex, employment, and education) and clinical (childhood sexual abuse, alcohol use disorder, substance use disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder) factors. Among BPD criteria, identity disturbance (OR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.37-3.56), chronic feelings of emptiness (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.03-2.57), and frantic efforts to avoid abandonment (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.17-3.16) emerged as significant independent factors associated with suicide attempt(s) over follow-up, when covarying for other significant factors and BPD criteria. Conclusions and Relevance: In the multisite, longitudinal study of adults with personality disorders, identity disturbance, chronic feelings of emptiness, and frantic efforts to avoid abandonment were significantly associated with suicide attempts. Identity disturbance, chronic feelings of emptiness, and frantic efforts to avoid abandonment may be clinically overlooked features of BPD in context of suicide risk assessment. In light of the high rates of BPD diagnostic remission, our findings suggest that these criteria should be independently assessed and targeted for further study as suicide risk factors.

Level of personality functioning as a predictor of psychosocial functioning-Concurrent validity of criterion A.

The alternative model for personality disorders (AMPD) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), defines personality functioning by assessment of impairment in Identity and Self-direction (Self component) and in Empathy and Intimacy (Interpersonal). These four domains constitute the Level of Personality Functioning Scale, a trans-diagnostic measure of PD severity. The association between the Level of Personality Functioning Scale and psychosocial impairment based on other previously established psychosocial functioning instruments has not been reported. A total of 317 individuals, including a representative clinical sample of 282 patients (192 with a personality disorder [PD] diagnosis), was evaluated with the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 AMPD Module I. Self-reported impairment was measured by the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS), and social and occupational impairment was assessed by the functioning score of the Global Assessment of Functioning scale (GAF-F). WSAS and GAF-F both correlated significantly with mean LPFS scores and the sum of DSM-IV PD criteria. For both measures, the mean LPFS was a stronger predictor for psychosocial impairment than the sum of DSM-IV PD criteria. Within the LPFS, the Self component was a better predictor than the Interpersonal component for both WSAS and GAF-F. For the four domains, the results diverged, with Identity as the strongest predictor by far for WSAS. Empathy was the only significant predictor for impairment evaluated by GAF-F, but its contribution to variance was not substantial. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Evaluation of Diagnostic Thresholds for Criterion A in the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders.

The Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS) of the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) was formulated to assess the presence and severity of personality disorders (PDs). Moderate impairment (Level 2) in personality functioning, as measured by the LPFS, was incorporated into the AMPD as a diagnostic threshold for PD in Criterion A of the general criteria, as well as for the "any two areas present" rule for assigning a specific PD diagnosis. This study represents the first evaluation of the diagnostic decision rules for Criterion A, in a clinical sample (N = 282). The results indicate that an overall diagnostic threshold for PDs should be used with caution because it may not identify all DSM-IV PDs. The "any two areas present" rule proved to be a reasonable alternative, although this finding should be interpreted with caution because the LPFS does not measure the disorder-specific A criteria.

Borderline personality disorder diagnosis in a new key.

BACKGROUND: Conceptualizations of personality disorders (PD) are increasingly moving towards dimensional approaches. The definition and assessment of borderline personality disorder (BPD) in regard to changes in nosology are of great importance to theory and practice as well as consumers. We studied empirical connections between the traditional DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for BPD and Criteria A and B of the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD). METHOD: Raters of varied professional backgrounds possessing substantial knowledge of PDs (N = 20) characterized BPD criteria with the four domains of the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS) and 25 pathological personality trait facets. Mean AMPD values of each BPD criterion were used to support a nosological cross-walk of the individual BPD criteria and study various combinations of BPD criteria in their AMPD translation. The grand mean AMPD profile generated from the experts was compared to published BPD prototypes that used AMPD trait ratings and the DSM-5-III hybrid categorical-dimensional algorithm for BPD. Divergent comparisons with DSM-5-III algorithms for other PDs and other published PD prototypes were also examined. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability analyses showed generally robust agreement. The AMPD profile for BPD criteria rated by individual BPD criteria was not isomorphic with whole-person ratings of BPD, although they were highly correlated. Various AMPD profiles for BPD were generated from theoretically relevant but differing configurations of BPD criteria. These AMPD profiles were highly correlated and showed meaningful divergence from non-BPD DSM-5-III algorithms and other PD prototypes. CONCLUSIONS: Results show that traditional DSM BPD diagnosis reflects a common core of PD severity, largely composed of LPFS and the pathological traits of anxiousness, depressively, emotional lability, and impulsivity. Results confirm the traditional DSM criterion-based BPD diagnosis can be reliably cross-walked with the full AMPD scheme, and both approaches share substantial construct overlap. This relative equivalence suggests the vast clinical and research literatures associated with BPD may be brought forward with DSM-5-III diagnosis of BPD.

Integrating the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) into clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: Diagnosis is a cornerstone of clinical practice for mental health care providers, yet traditional diagnostic systems have well-known shortcomings, including inadequate reliability, high comorbidity, and marked within-diagnosis heterogeneity. The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is a data-driven, hierarchically based alternative to traditional classifications that conceptualizes psychopathology as a set of dimensions organized into increasingly broad, transdiagnostic spectra. Prior work has shown that using a dimensional approach improves reliability and validity, but translating a model like HiTOP into a workable system that is useful for health care providers remains a major challenge. METHOD: The present work outlines the HiTOP model and describes the core principles to guide its integration into clinical practice. RESULTS: Potential advantages and limitations of the HiTOP model for clinical utility are reviewed, including with respect to case conceptualization and treatment planning. A HiTOP approach to practice is illustrated and contrasted with an approach based on traditional nosology. Common barriers to using HiTOP in real-world health care settings and solutions to these barriers are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: HiTOP represents a viable alternative to classifying mental illness that can be integrated into practice today, although research is needed to further establish its utility. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

A Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology Can Transform Mental Health Research.

For more than a century, research on psychopathology has focused on categorical diagnoses. Although this work has produced major discoveries, growing evidence points to the superiority of a dimensional approach to the science of mental illness. Here we outline one such dimensional system-the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP)-that is based on empirical patterns of co-occurrence among psychological symptoms. We highlight key ways in which this framework can advance mental-health research, and we provide some heuristics for using HiTOP to test theories of psychopathology. We then review emerging evidence that supports the value of a hierarchical, dimensional model of mental illness across diverse research areas in psychological science. These new data suggest that the HiTOP system has the potential to accelerate and improve research on mental-health problems as well as efforts to more effectively assess, prevent, and treat mental illness.

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

The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) presents an alternative model for personality disorders in which severity of personality pathology is evaluated by the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS). The Structured Interview for the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders, Module I (SCID-5-AMPD I) is a new tool for LPFS assessment, but its interrater reliability (IRR) has not yet been tested. Here we examined the reliability of the Norwegian translation of the SCID-5-AMPD I, applying two different designs: IRR assessment based on ratings of 17 video-recorded SCID-5-AMPD I interviews by five raters; and test-retest IRR based on interviews of 33 patients administered by two different raters within a short interval. For the video-based investigation, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values ranged from .77 to .94 for subdomains, .89 to .95 for domains, and .96 for total LPFS. For the test-retest investigation, ICC ranged from .24 to .72 for subdomains, .59 to .90 for domains, and .75 for total LPFS. The test-retest study revealed questionable reliability estimates for some subdomains. However, overall the level of personality functioning was measured with a sufficient degree of IRR when assessed by the SCID-5-AMPD I.

Borderline personality disorder is equally trait-like and state-like over ten years in adult psychiatric patients.

Borderline personality disorder (PD) has historically been cast as an unabating condition. Longitudinal data, however, support a more variable time course marked by remission and relapse. In the present study, we tested the possibility that borderline PD has both stable (i.e., consistently present across time and situation, as modern diagnostic systems stipulate) and dynamic (i.e., episodic and situational) elements. Participants were 668 patients from the Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study who were administered semistructured diagnostic interviews 5 times over a decade. Trait-state-occasion modeling dissected borderline pathology into time-invariant (i.e., trait) and time-varying (i.e., state) components. Contradicting traditional views of PD intransigence, less than half of borderline PD variability (approximately 45%) was time-invariant (i.e., perfectly stable) over the study timeframe. Furthermore, we found that the time-invariant component of borderline pathology, which we termed borderline proneness, was very closely related (r = .81) to a previously validated Five Factor Model trait composite of borderline features. Moreover, the trait versus state components showed a clear pattern of discriminant validity in relation to several putative causal agents for borderline PD (i.e., environmental pathogens, temperament dimensions). We conclude that borderline pathology contains a stable core and sizable situational components, and that both elements relate systematically to normative personality dimensions and known risk factors. These findings have key implications for etiological research, prognosis, and treatment for borderline PD. (PsycINFO Database Record

Borderline personality disorder.

Caretakers are often intimidated or alienated by patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD), compounding the clinical challenges posed by the severe morbidity, high social costs and substantial prevalence of this disorder in many health-care settings. BPD is found in ∼1.7% of the general population but in 15-28% of patients in psychiatric clinics or hospitals and in a large proportion of individuals seeking help for psychological problems in general health facilities. BPD is characterized by extreme sensitivity to perceived interpersonal slights, an unstable sense of self, intense and volatile emotionality and impulsive behaviours that are often self-destructive. Most patients gradually enter symptomatic remission, and their rate of remission can be accelerated by evidence-based psychosocial treatments. Although self-harming behaviours and proneness to crisis can decrease over time, the natural course and otherwise effective treatments of BPD usually leave many patients with persistent and severe social disabilities related to depression or self-harming behaviours. Thus, clinicians need to actively enquire about the central issues of interpersonal relations and unstable identity. Failure to correctly diagnose patients with BPD leads to misleading pharmacological interventions that rarely succeed. Whether the definition of BPD should change is under debate that is linked to not fully knowing the nature of this disorder.

Impact of personality pathology on psychosocial functioning.

Personality disorders impair social, occupational, leisure, and global functioning more than a significant disorder such as major depressive disorder. Impairment is found in clinical and community populations. Impairment is independent of co-occurring other mental disorders. Impairment is more stable over time than are the diagnoses themselves. Personality traits are also impairing and may be more predictive of outcomes over time, but a hybrid of personality disorder features and normal range personality traits may be the most predictive model. A general, 'transdiagnostic,' self-other severity factor may be important for understanding the relationship of personality pathology and psychosocial functioning over time. The Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders may be useful for the study of psychosocial functioning in individuals with personality pathology.

The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A dimensional alternative to traditional nosologies.

The reliability and validity of traditional taxonomies are limited by arbitrary boundaries between psychopathology and normality, often unclear boundaries between disorders, frequent disorder co-occurrence, heterogeneity within disorders, and diagnostic instability. These taxonomies went beyond evidence available on the structure of psychopathology and were shaped by a variety of other considerations, which may explain the aforementioned shortcomings. The Hierarchical Taxonomy Of Psychopathology (HiTOP) model has emerged as a research effort to address these problems. It constructs psychopathological syndromes and their components/subtypes based on the observed covariation of symptoms, grouping related symptoms together and thus reducing heterogeneity. It also combines co-occurring syndromes into spectra, thereby mapping out comorbidity. Moreover, it characterizes these phenomena dimensionally, which addresses boundary problems and diagnostic instability. Here, we review the development of the HiTOP and the relevant evidence. The new classification already covers most forms of psychopathology. Dimensional measures have been developed to assess many of the identified components, syndromes, and spectra. Several domains of this model are ready for clinical and research applications. The HiTOP promises to improve research and clinical practice by addressing the aforementioned shortcomings of traditional nosologies. It also provides an effective way to summarize and convey information on risk factors, etiology, pathophysiology, phenomenology, illness course, and treatment response. This can greatly improve the utility of the diagnosis of mental disorders. The new classification remains a work in progress. However, it is developing rapidly and is poised to advance mental health research and care significantly as the relevant science matures. (PsycINFO Database Record