Johannes Zimmermann1, André Kerber2, Katharina Rek3, Christopher J Hopwood4, Robert F Krueger5. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Kassel, Holländische Str. 36-38, 34127, Kassel, Germany. jz@uni-kassel.de. 2. Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 3. Max-Planck-Institut für Psychiatrie, Munich, Germany. 4. University of California, Davis, CA, USA. 5. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Both the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) and the chapter on personality disorders (PD) in the recent version of ICD-11 embody a shift from a categorical to a dimensional paradigm for the classification of PD. We describe these new models, summarize available measures, and provide a comprehensive review of research on the AMPD. RECENT FINDINGS: A total of 237 publications on severity (criterion A) and maladaptive traits (criterion B) of the AMPD indicate (a) acceptable interrater reliability, (b) largely consistent latent structures, (c) substantial convergence with a range of theoretically and clinically relevant external measures, and (d) some evidence for incremental validity when controlling for categorical PD diagnoses. However, measures of criterion A and B are highly correlated, which poses conceptual challenges. The AMPD has stimulated extensive research with promising findings. We highlight open questions and provide recommendations for future research.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Both the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) and the chapter on personality disorders (PD) in the recent version of ICD-11 embody a shift from a categorical to a dimensional paradigm for the classification of PD. We describe these new models, summarize available measures, and provide a comprehensive review of research on the AMPD. RECENT FINDINGS: A total of 237 publications on severity (criterion A) and maladaptive traits (criterion B) of the AMPD indicate (a) acceptable interrater reliability, (b) largely consistent latent structures, (c) substantial convergence with a range of theoretically and clinically relevant external measures, and (d) some evidence for incremental validity when controlling for categorical PD diagnoses. However, measures of criterion A and B are highly correlated, which poses conceptual challenges. The AMPD has stimulated extensive research with promising findings. We highlight open questions and provide recommendations for future research.
Authors: Andrea Fossati; Robert F Krueger; Kristian E Markon; Serena Borroni; Cesare Maffei; Antonella Somma Journal: J Nerv Ment Dis Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 2.254
Authors: Dominick Gamache; Claudia Savard; Philippe Leclerc; Maude Payant; Alexandre Côté; Jonathan Faucher; Mireille Lampron; Marc Tremblay Journal: Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul Date: 2021-02-11
Authors: Abby L Mulay; Mark H Waugh; J Parks Fillauer; Donna S Bender; Anthony Bram; Nicole M Cain; Eve Caligor; Miriam K Forbes; Laurel B Goodrich; Jan H Kamphuis; Jared W Keeley; Robert F Krueger; John E Kurtz; Peter Jacobsson; Katie C Lewis; Gina M P Rossi; Jeremy M Ridenour; Michael Roche; Martin Sellbom; Carla Sharp; Andrew E Skodol Journal: Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul Date: 2019-12-02