Improving the Recognition of Borderline Personality Disorder in a Bipolar World.

Both bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder (BPD) are serious mental health disorders resulting in significant psychosocial morbidity, reduced health-related quality of life, and excess mortality. Yet research on BPD has received much less funding from the National Institute of Health (NIH) than has bipolar disorder during the past 25 years. Why hasn't the level of NIH research funding for BPD been commensurate with the level of psychosocial morbidity, mortality, and health expenditures associated with the disorder? In the present article, the author illustrates how the bipolar disorder research community has done a superior job of "marketing" their disorder. Studies of underdiagnosis, screening, diagnostic spectra, and economics are reviewed for both bipolar disorder and BPD. Researchers of bipolar disorder have conducted multiple studies highlighting the problem with underdiagnosis, developed and promoted several screening scales, published numerous studies of the operating characteristics of these screening measures, attempted to broaden the definition of bipolar disorder by advancing the concept of the bipolar spectrum, and repeatedly demonstrated the economic costs and public health significance of bipolar disorder. In contrast, researchers of BPD have almost completely ignored each of these four issues and research efforts. Although BPD is as frequent as (if not more frequent than) bipolar disorder, as impairing as (if not more impairing than) bipolar disorder, and as lethal as (if not more lethal than) bipolar disorder, it has received less than one-tenth the level of funding from the NIH and has been the focus of many fewer publications in the most prestigious psychiatric journals. The researchers of BPD should consider adopting the strategy taken by researchers of bipolar disorder before the diagnosis is eliminated in a future iteration of the DSM or the ICD.