Head-to-head comparisons of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition, Section II and Section III personality disorder in predicting clinical outcomes.

Carla Sharp, Joshua D Miller
{"title":"Head-to-head comparisons of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition, Section II and Section III personality disorder in predicting clinical outcomes.","authors":"Carla Sharp, Joshua D Miller","doi":"10.1037/per0000691","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 2022, <i>PDs: Theory, Research, and Treatment</i> published a 10-year retrospective on the <i>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,</i> fifth edition (DSM-5), Section III, Alternative Model for PDs (AMPD; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). The articles of the 10-year retrospective provided evidence in support of the validity, reliability, and clinical utility of the AMPD. Specifically, it provided evidence in support of the unidimensional factor structure of the LPF and the five-dimensional structure of the pathological trait domains. In addition, evidence in support of the construct validity of the LPF in its association with psychiatric severity, functional outcomes, traditional PDs, cognitive, emotional, and contextual correlates, and other indices of maladaptive self- and interpersonal functioning was provided. Despite this evidence, a significant gap has since been identified related to how the American Psychiatric Association (APA) decides to accept proposed revisions to diagnostic criteria. The goal of the current special issue is to address this gap. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":74420,"journal":{"name":"Personality disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000691","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 2022, PDs: Theory, Research, and Treatment published a 10-year retrospective on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5), Section III, Alternative Model for PDs (AMPD; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). The articles of the 10-year retrospective provided evidence in support of the validity, reliability, and clinical utility of the AMPD. Specifically, it provided evidence in support of the unidimensional factor structure of the LPF and the five-dimensional structure of the pathological trait domains. In addition, evidence in support of the construct validity of the LPF in its association with psychiatric severity, functional outcomes, traditional PDs, cognitive, emotional, and contextual correlates, and other indices of maladaptive self- and interpersonal functioning was provided. Despite this evidence, a significant gap has since been identified related to how the American Psychiatric Association (APA) decides to accept proposed revisions to diagnostic criteria. The goal of the current special issue is to address this gap. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第五版第二部分和第三部分人格障碍在预测临床结果方面的正面比较。
2022 年,《精神障碍:理论、研究和治疗》杂志发表了关于《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5)第三部分 "精神障碍替代模式"(AMPD;美国精神病学协会,2013 年)的十年回顾文章。十年回顾的文章为 AMPD 的有效性、可靠性和临床实用性提供了证据支持。具体来说,它为 LPF 的单维因子结构和病理特质域的五维结构提供了支持证据。此外,研究还提供了 LPF 与精神病严重程度、功能结果、传统 PD、认知、情绪和环境相关性以及其他适应不良的自我和人际功能指数相关联的建构有效性证据。尽管有这些证据,但在美国精神病学协会(APA)如何决定接受诊断标准的修订建议方面,仍然存在着巨大的差距。本期特刊的目标就是解决这一空白。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparing the clinical utility of the alternative model for personality disorders to the Section II personality disorder model: A randomized controlled trial. Comparing the DSM-5 categorical model of personality disorders and the alternative model of personality disorders regarding clinician judgments of risk and outcome. Comparing the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition, personality disorder models scored from the same interview. Longitudinal prediction of psychosocial functioning outcomes: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Section-II personality disorders versus alternative model personality dysfunction and traits. Prospective prediction of treatment outcomes in adolescents: A head-to-head comparison of alternative model for personality disorder versus borderline personality disorder.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1