OBJECTIVE: This study tested the factor structure of the DSM-IV criteria for borderline personality disorder by using confirmatory methods for the analysis of covariance structures in a large group from a multisite study. METHOD: A total of 668 primarily treatment-seeking subjects were reliably assessed for personality disorders by using the Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders. Associations among criteria for borderline personality disorder were examined. A confirmatory factor analysis was performed to test diagnosis as a unitary construct and to test an earlier-reported three-factor model comprising disturbed relatedness, behavioral dysregulation, and affective dysregulation. The three-factor model was subsequently tested by using a subset (N=498) of the study group that was reassessed 2 years later by independent evaluators who were blind to original diagnoses. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the borderline personality disorder diagnosis was adequate for both baseline and follow-up assessments. A confirmatory factor analysis model testing the borderline personality disorder diagnosis as a unitary construct provided good fit, and the three-factor model offered a significantly better fit for the baseline assessment. The three-factor model was replicated with the 2-year follow-up data. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic criteria for borderline personality disorder appear to reflect a statistically coherent construct. Three homogeneous components were supported empirically, lending conceptual clarity to different classes of the criteria for borderline personality disorder.
OBJECTIVE: This study tested the factor structure of the DSM-IV criteria for borderline personality disorder by using confirmatory methods for the analysis of covariance structures in a large group from a multisite study. METHOD: A total of 668 primarily treatment-seeking subjects were reliably assessed for personality disorders by using the Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders. Associations among criteria for borderline personality disorder were examined. A confirmatory factor analysis was performed to test diagnosis as a unitary construct and to test an earlier-reported three-factor model comprising disturbed relatedness, behavioral dysregulation, and affective dysregulation. The three-factor model was subsequently tested by using a subset (N=498) of the study group that was reassessed 2 years later by independent evaluators who were blind to original diagnoses. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the borderline personality disorder diagnosis was adequate for both baseline and follow-up assessments. A confirmatory factor analysis model testing the borderline personality disorder diagnosis as a unitary construct provided good fit, and the three-factor model offered a significantly better fit for the baseline assessment. The three-factor model was replicated with the 2-year follow-up data. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic criteria for borderline personality disorder appear to reflect a statistically coherent construct. Three homogeneous components were supported empirically, lending conceptual clarity to different classes of the criteria for borderline personality disorder.
Authors: Igor Weinberg; Elsa Ronningstam; Mark J Goldblatt; Mark Schechter; John T Maltsberger Journal: Curr Psychiatry Rep Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 5.285
Authors: Andrew E Skodol; John G Gunderson; M Tracie Shea; Thomas H McGlashan; Leslie C Morey; Charles A Sanislow; Donna S Bender; Carlos M Grilo; Mary C Zanarini; Shirley Yen; Maria E Pagano; Robert L Stout Journal: J Pers Disord Date: 2005-10
Authors: M Tracie Shea; M O Edelen; A Pinto; S Yen; J G Gunderson; A E Skodol; J Markowitz; C A Sanislow; C M Grilo; E Ansell; M T Daversa; M C Zanarini; T H McGlashan; L C Morey Journal: Acta Psychiatr Scand Date: 2008-10-10 Impact factor: 6.392