在少数民族患者中边缘型人格障碍的诊断是否存在偏见?

Lena G Becker, Shayan Asadi, Mark Zimmerman, Theresa A Morgan, Craig Rodriguez-Seijas
{"title":"在少数民族患者中边缘型人格障碍的诊断是否存在偏见?","authors":"Lena G Becker,&nbsp;Shayan Asadi,&nbsp;Mark Zimmerman,&nbsp;Theresa A Morgan,&nbsp;Craig Rodriguez-Seijas","doi":"10.1037/per0000579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Empirical evidence documents disparities in the diagnosis of severe forms of psychopathology among racial/ethnic minority persons. However, research on diagnostic differences in personality disorders is equivocal: Some suggest higher prevalence of personality disorders among racial/ethnic minority persons, whereas other results suggest the opposite. The goal of the current study was to investigate (a) differences in the diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD) in a mostly cisgender, heterosexual sample among racial/ethnic minority patients compared with non-Hispanic White patients and (b) whether any observed differences were attributable to differences in underlying maladaptive personality domains. Using data from partial hospital patients (<i>N</i> = 2,657), we found few differences in the diagnosis of BPD based on racial/ethnic group membership. We also conducted measurement invariance analyses of the Personality Inventory for <i>DSM-5-</i>Brief Form (PID-5-BF), finding evidence of invariance across White and non-White participants in these data. Any instances of diagnostic disparity were explained by group differences in maladaptive personality domains. These results provide context to the extant literature documenting mixed results about racial/ethnic differences in prevalence of personality disorders. In addition, they suggest relative specificity in BPD diagnostic bias related to sexual minority populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":74420,"journal":{"name":"Personality disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is there a bias in the diagnosis of borderline personality disorder among racially minoritized patients?\",\"authors\":\"Lena G Becker,&nbsp;Shayan Asadi,&nbsp;Mark Zimmerman,&nbsp;Theresa A Morgan,&nbsp;Craig Rodriguez-Seijas\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/per0000579\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Empirical evidence documents disparities in the diagnosis of severe forms of psychopathology among racial/ethnic minority persons. However, research on diagnostic differences in personality disorders is equivocal: Some suggest higher prevalence of personality disorders among racial/ethnic minority persons, whereas other results suggest the opposite. The goal of the current study was to investigate (a) differences in the diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD) in a mostly cisgender, heterosexual sample among racial/ethnic minority patients compared with non-Hispanic White patients and (b) whether any observed differences were attributable to differences in underlying maladaptive personality domains. Using data from partial hospital patients (<i>N</i> = 2,657), we found few differences in the diagnosis of BPD based on racial/ethnic group membership. We also conducted measurement invariance analyses of the Personality Inventory for <i>DSM-5-</i>Brief Form (PID-5-BF), finding evidence of invariance across White and non-White participants in these data. Any instances of diagnostic disparity were explained by group differences in maladaptive personality domains. These results provide context to the extant literature documenting mixed results about racial/ethnic differences in prevalence of personality disorders. In addition, they suggest relative specificity in BPD diagnostic bias related to sexual minority populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74420,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Personality disorders\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Personality disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000579\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000579","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

经验证据证明,在种族/少数民族人群中,严重精神病理形式的诊断存在差异。然而,关于人格障碍诊断差异的研究是模棱两可的:一些研究表明,少数民族/种族人群中人格障碍的患病率较高,而另一些研究结果则相反。本研究的目的是调查(a)与非西班牙裔白人患者相比,在多数为异性恋的种族/少数族裔患者中,边缘型人格障碍(BPD)的诊断差异,以及(b)观察到的差异是否可归因于潜在的适应不良人格领域的差异。使用部分医院患者的数据(N = 2657),我们发现基于种族/民族成员的BPD诊断差异不大。我们还对DSM-5-Brief Form (PID-5-BF)的人格量表(Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Brief Form, PID-5-BF)进行了测量不变性分析,发现这些数据在白人和非白人参与者之间存在不变性。任何诊断差异的例子都可以用不适应人格领域的群体差异来解释。这些结果为现有文献提供了背景,这些文献记录了关于人格障碍患病率的种族/民族差异的混合结果。此外,他们还提出了与性少数人群相关的BPD诊断偏差的相对特异性。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
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
Is there a bias in the diagnosis of borderline personality disorder among racially minoritized patients?

Empirical evidence documents disparities in the diagnosis of severe forms of psychopathology among racial/ethnic minority persons. However, research on diagnostic differences in personality disorders is equivocal: Some suggest higher prevalence of personality disorders among racial/ethnic minority persons, whereas other results suggest the opposite. The goal of the current study was to investigate (a) differences in the diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD) in a mostly cisgender, heterosexual sample among racial/ethnic minority patients compared with non-Hispanic White patients and (b) whether any observed differences were attributable to differences in underlying maladaptive personality domains. Using data from partial hospital patients (N = 2,657), we found few differences in the diagnosis of BPD based on racial/ethnic group membership. We also conducted measurement invariance analyses of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Brief Form (PID-5-BF), finding evidence of invariance across White and non-White participants in these data. Any instances of diagnostic disparity were explained by group differences in maladaptive personality domains. These results provide context to the extant literature documenting mixed results about racial/ethnic differences in prevalence of personality disorders. In addition, they suggest relative specificity in BPD diagnostic bias related to sexual minority populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

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
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