Wherefrom and Whither PD? Recent Developments and Future Possibilities in DSM-5 and ICD-11 Personality Disorder Diagnosis.

IF 5.5 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Lee Anna Clark
{"title":"Wherefrom and Whither PD? Recent Developments and Future Possibilities in DSM-5 and ICD-11 Personality Disorder Diagnosis.","authors":"Lee Anna Clark","doi":"10.1007/s11920-025-01602-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Provide an overview of the Alternative DSM-5 model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) and ICD-11's PD diagnostic model; review the models' assessment measures and construct validity; describe the models' current and ongoing status.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The models have many content similarities but differ significantly in that maladaptive-range traits are an AMPD requirement, but optional specifiers in ICD-11. An extensive literature using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) has yielded comprehensive reviews of its clinical utility and construct validity. Structural meta-analyses found three core facets for each of the five domains, and correlations with non-FFM measures identified 13 traits with maladaptive content not assessed by the PID-5. Joint analyses of AMPD personality-functioning measures find a clear general factor, but have raised concerns about discriminant validity among measures and with Criterion B. For both criteria, the multimethod assessment literature is sparce. Regarding ICD-11, few measures assess the required personality functioning, but one has shown promising construct validity. Multiple measures assess the optional trait specifiers, the most noteworthy of which was developed by an international group, exists in 12 languages, and assesses all six domains of the DSM-5 and ICD-11.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The status of the ongoing revision process for the AMPD is described. It seems likely-but far from guaranteed-to result in a dimensional model in the main DSM-5 section. The next step for the ICD-11 is development of a version with Research Diagnostic Criteria, but the timeline is unknown.</p>","PeriodicalId":11057,"journal":{"name":"Current Psychiatry Reports","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","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/s11920-025-01602-y","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: Provide an overview of the Alternative DSM-5 model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) and ICD-11's PD diagnostic model; review the models' assessment measures and construct validity; describe the models' current and ongoing status.

Recent findings: The models have many content similarities but differ significantly in that maladaptive-range traits are an AMPD requirement, but optional specifiers in ICD-11. An extensive literature using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) has yielded comprehensive reviews of its clinical utility and construct validity. Structural meta-analyses found three core facets for each of the five domains, and correlations with non-FFM measures identified 13 traits with maladaptive content not assessed by the PID-5. Joint analyses of AMPD personality-functioning measures find a clear general factor, but have raised concerns about discriminant validity among measures and with Criterion B. For both criteria, the multimethod assessment literature is sparce. Regarding ICD-11, few measures assess the required personality functioning, but one has shown promising construct validity. Multiple measures assess the optional trait specifiers, the most noteworthy of which was developed by an international group, exists in 12 languages, and assesses all six domains of the DSM-5 and ICD-11.

Conclusion: The status of the ongoing revision process for the AMPD is described. It seems likely-but far from guaranteed-to result in a dimensional model in the main DSM-5 section. The next step for the ICD-11 is development of a version with Research Diagnostic Criteria, but the timeline is unknown.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
3.00%
发文量
68
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信