| Autor: |
Gutiérrez F; Institute of Neuroscience, Hospital Clinic., Aluja A; Lleida Institute for Biomedical Research Dr. Pifarre Foundation., Ruiz Rodríguez J; Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychobiology, University of Barcelona., Peri JM; Institute of Neuroscience, Hospital Clinic., Gárriz M; Neuropsychiatry and Drug Addiction Institute, Parc de Salut Mar., Garcia LF; Lleida Institute for Biomedical Research Dr. Pifarre Foundation., Sorrel MA; Faculty of Psychology, Autonomous University of Madrid., Sureda B; Institute of Neuroscience, Hospital Clinic., Vall G; Lleida Institute for Biomedical Research Dr. Pifarre Foundation., Ferrer M; Psychiatry Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Network Centre for Biomedical Research in Mental Health (CIBERSAM)., Calvo N; Psychiatry Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Network Centre for Biomedical Research in Mental Health (CIBERSAM). |
| Abstrakt: |
The inclusion of the borderline pattern in the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) dimensional classification of personality disorders (PDs) has caused controversy. Unease about leaving out these clinically challenging patients seems to conflict with the need of an evidence-based and credible diagnostic system. However, the accommodation of borderline within the new diagnostic system has not yet been studied in depth. To this end, we examine in a sample of 1799 general population and clinical subjects the joint structure of the five initial ICD-11 domains and the borderline pattern. Regression and item-level factor analyses reveal that borderline criteria do not form a separate construct and are indissociable from negative affectivity. Furthermore, borderline adds nothing to the remaining domains when it comes to predict PD severity. The borderline pattern appears as largely superfluous and even misguiding, unless their criteria are properly integrated within the structure of personality pathology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved). |
