伊朗人格障碍替代模式(AMPD)研究:叙述性文献综述》。

IF 1.9 Q3 PSYCHIATRY Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-10 DOI:10.1177/02537176241281888
Saeid Komasi, Martin Sellbom, Christopher J Hopwood
{"title":"伊朗人格障碍替代模式(AMPD)研究:叙述性文献综述》。","authors":"Saeid Komasi, Martin Sellbom, Christopher J Hopwood","doi":"10.1177/02537176241281888","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many original studies have evaluated the validity and utility of the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) in Iran. However, the present review is a unique attempt to summarize the data in a critical framework to cover gaps in the AMPD research and determine future directions. The review aimed to explore the psychometric evidence for the AMPD, including reliability (alpha coefficient) and validity (construct, convergent, criterion, and incremental types) data in Iran. We also reviewed the overlap between the two AMPD criteria and the associations between the constructs and general psychopathology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, PsycNet, Google Scholar, and three national databases for English and Persian records related to the AMPD from January 2013 to 2023. Several keywords and criteria were applied to select studies before summarizing the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The self-report scales were the first-line measures to assess the AMPD constructs, while interviews were rarely used. The research body provided relative support for both the unidimensional nature of Criterion A measures and the five-factor structure of Criterion B measures. Regarding Criterion B, however, there are still questions about the validity of the disinhibition factor and its clinical utility and generalizability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although a decade of research on the AMPD in Iran has contributed to improving our knowledge, the current review provided a more comprehensive and clear profile of this model's validity and generalizability to Iranian culture. We discussed the details of validation studies, limitations, and future considerations.</p>","PeriodicalId":13476,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"02537176241281888"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11572366/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Research on the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) in Iran: A Narrative Literature Review.\",\"authors\":\"Saeid Komasi, Martin Sellbom, Christopher J Hopwood\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02537176241281888\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many original studies have evaluated the validity and utility of the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) in Iran. However, the present review is a unique attempt to summarize the data in a critical framework to cover gaps in the AMPD research and determine future directions. The review aimed to explore the psychometric evidence for the AMPD, including reliability (alpha coefficient) and validity (construct, convergent, criterion, and incremental types) data in Iran. We also reviewed the overlap between the two AMPD criteria and the associations between the constructs and general psychopathology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, PsycNet, Google Scholar, and three national databases for English and Persian records related to the AMPD from January 2013 to 2023. Several keywords and criteria were applied to select studies before summarizing the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The self-report scales were the first-line measures to assess the AMPD constructs, while interviews were rarely used. The research body provided relative support for both the unidimensional nature of Criterion A measures and the five-factor structure of Criterion B measures. Regarding Criterion B, however, there are still questions about the validity of the disinhibition factor and its clinical utility and generalizability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although a decade of research on the AMPD in Iran has contributed to improving our knowledge, the current review provided a more comprehensive and clear profile of this model's validity and generalizability to Iranian culture. We discussed the details of validation studies, limitations, and future considerations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"02537176241281888\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11572366/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02537176241281888\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02537176241281888","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:许多原创性研究对伊朗人格障碍替代模式(AMPD)的有效性和实用性进行了评估。然而,本综述是一次独特的尝试,它在一个关键的框架内对数据进行了总结,以弥补 AMPD 研究中的不足并确定未来的研究方向。综述旨在探索 AMPD 的心理测量证据,包括伊朗的信度(α 系数)和效度(建构、收敛、标准和增量类型)数据。我们还审查了两个 AMPD 标准之间的重叠情况,以及构念与一般精神病理学之间的关联:我们在 PubMed、PsycNet、Google Scholar 和三个国家数据库中搜索了 2013 年 1 月至 2023 年期间与 AMPD 相关的英语和波斯语记录。在总结数据之前,我们使用了几个关键词和标准来选择研究:自我报告量表是评估 AMPD 构建的第一线测量方法,而访谈则很少使用。研究机构为标准 A 测量的单维性质和标准 B 测量的五因素结构提供了相对支持。然而,关于标准 B,抑制因子的有效性及其临床实用性和普适性仍存在疑问:尽管十年来伊朗对 AMPD 的研究为增进我们的知识做出了贡献,但目前的综述对该模型在伊朗文化中的有效性和普适性提供了更全面、更清晰的描述。我们讨论了验证研究的细节、局限性和未来的考虑因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Research on the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) in Iran: A Narrative Literature Review.

Background: Many original studies have evaluated the validity and utility of the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) in Iran. However, the present review is a unique attempt to summarize the data in a critical framework to cover gaps in the AMPD research and determine future directions. The review aimed to explore the psychometric evidence for the AMPD, including reliability (alpha coefficient) and validity (construct, convergent, criterion, and incremental types) data in Iran. We also reviewed the overlap between the two AMPD criteria and the associations between the constructs and general psychopathology.

Methods: We searched PubMed, PsycNet, Google Scholar, and three national databases for English and Persian records related to the AMPD from January 2013 to 2023. Several keywords and criteria were applied to select studies before summarizing the data.

Results: The self-report scales were the first-line measures to assess the AMPD constructs, while interviews were rarely used. The research body provided relative support for both the unidimensional nature of Criterion A measures and the five-factor structure of Criterion B measures. Regarding Criterion B, however, there are still questions about the validity of the disinhibition factor and its clinical utility and generalizability.

Conclusion: Although a decade of research on the AMPD in Iran has contributed to improving our knowledge, the current review provided a more comprehensive and clear profile of this model's validity and generalizability to Iranian culture. We discussed the details of validation studies, limitations, and future considerations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.10%
发文量
116
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine (ISSN 0253-7176) was started in 1978 as the official publication of the Indian Psychiatric Society South Zonal Branch. The journal allows free access (Open Access) and is published Bimonthly. The Journal includes but is not limited to review articles, original research, opinions, and letters. The Editor and publisher accept no legal responsibility for any opinions, omissions or errors by the authors, nor do they approve of any product advertised within the journal.
期刊最新文献
Buprenorphine Induced Nicolau Syndrome: A Case Report. Stress, Anxiety, and Depression in the First-year Students of Medical Education: A Prospective Cohort Study from a Women's Medical College in South India. Personality Dimension, Suicidal Intent, and Lethality: A Cross-sectional Study of Suicide Attempters with or Without Personality Disorders. Heart Rate Variability for Supplementing Withdrawal Assessment in Patients with Opioid Dependence: An Exploratory Study. The Many Faces of Guilt: A Review Mapping Unique and Overlapping Expressions in OCD and Depression.
×
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