Personality Disorders in Criminal Offenders - A Systematic Literature Review.

IF 5.5 2区医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY

Current Psychiatry Reports Pub Date : 2024-10-16 DOI:10.1007/s11920-024-01541-0

Aleya Flechsenhar, Sarah Back, Max Knabe, Katja Bertsch

{"title":"Personality Disorders in Criminal Offenders - A Systematic Literature Review.","authors":"Aleya Flechsenhar, Sarah Back, Max Knabe, Katja Bertsch","doi":"10.1007/s11920-024-01541-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose of review: We summarized studies investigating measures related to the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) of the DSM-5 and the personality model in ICD-11 in offenders in forensic-psychiatric treatment or prison to evaluate its forensic utility.Recent findings: The reformation of the DSM and ICD with regards to the introduction of dimensional assessments of personality disorders holds many advantages over categorical models concerning clinical utility. With regards to DSM-5 AMPD Criterion A, a limited number of studies (k = 4) report impairments in interpersonal functioning in offenders. Studies assessing Criterion B (k = 13) predominantly report higher personality impairment measures for offenders, especially for antagonism and disinhibition. Due to the heterogeneity of the selected studies, this review cannot draw conclusions with regard to the predictive value of dimensional models for offenders in forensic-psychiatric treatment or prison, but provides initial evidence for the validity and utility of DSM-5 AMPD and ICD-11 in these settings.","PeriodicalId":11057,"journal":{"name":"Current Psychiatry Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Psychiatry Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-024-01541-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: We summarized studies investigating measures related to the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) of the DSM-5 and the personality model in ICD-11 in offenders in forensic-psychiatric treatment or prison to evaluate its forensic utility.

Recent findings: The reformation of the DSM and ICD with regards to the introduction of dimensional assessments of personality disorders holds many advantages over categorical models concerning clinical utility. With regards to DSM-5 AMPD Criterion A, a limited number of studies (k = 4) report impairments in interpersonal functioning in offenders. Studies assessing Criterion B (k = 13) predominantly report higher personality impairment measures for offenders, especially for antagonism and disinhibition. Due to the heterogeneity of the selected studies, this review cannot draw conclusions with regard to the predictive value of dimensional models for offenders in forensic-psychiatric treatment or prison, but provides initial evidence for the validity and utility of DSM-5 AMPD and ICD-11 in these settings.

查看原文本刊更多论文

刑事罪犯的人格障碍--系统性文献综述。

综述目的：我们总结了与DSM-5人格障碍替代模式（AMPD）和ICD-11人格模式相关的研究，这些研究调查了接受法医精神病治疗或在监狱服刑的罪犯，以评估其法医实用性：最近的研究结果：DSM 和 ICD 的改革引入了人格障碍的维度评估，与分类模型相比，在临床实用性方面具有许多优势。关于DSM-5 AMPD标准A，数量有限的研究（k = 4）报告了罪犯在人际交往功能方面的障碍。评估标准 B 的研究（k = 13）主要报告了罪犯较高的人格损害程度，尤其是对抗性和抑制性。由于所选研究的异质性，本综述无法就维度模型对接受法医精神病治疗或监狱罪犯的预测价值得出结论，但为DSM-5 AMPD和ICD-11在这些环境中的有效性和实用性提供了初步证据。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Current Psychiatry Reports PSYCHIATRY-

CiteScore

11.30

自引率

3.00%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： This journal aims to review the most important, recently published research in psychiatry. By providing clear, insightful, balanced contributions by international experts, the journal intends to serve all those involved in the care of those affected by psychiatric disorders. We accomplish this aim by appointing international authorities to serve as Section Editors in key subject areas, such as anxiety, medicopsychiatric disorders, and schizophrenia and other related psychotic disorders. Section Editors, in turn, select topics for which leading experts contribute comprehensive review articles that emphasize new developments and recently published papers of major importance, highlighted by annotated reference lists. An international Editorial Board reviews the annual table of contents, suggests articles of special interest to their country/region, and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research. Commentaries from well-known figures in the field are also provided.