精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第五版,人格障碍与替代模式:一年后对自然观察行为、人际功能和精神症状的预测。

Personality disorders Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-29 DOI:10.1037/per0000677
William R Calabrese, Leah T Emery, Chloe M Evans, Leonard J Simms
{"title":"精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第五版,人格障碍与替代模式:一年后对自然观察行为、人际功能和精神症状的预测。","authors":"William R Calabrese, Leah T Emery, Chloe M Evans, Leonard J Simms","doi":"10.1037/per0000677","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Traditional personality disorders (PDs; e.g., <i>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition [DSM-5</i>] Section II PDs), as well as dimensional traits (e.g., alternative model for PD [AMPD]), offer unique advantages in personality pathology assessment. However, very little is known about how these systems compare in predicting observable behavior. This study compares self-report ratings of PD symptoms (i.e., Structured Clinical Interview for <i>DSM-IV</i> PD) with self-reports of AMPD traits (i.e., Personality Inventory for <i>DSM</i>-<i>5</i>) in predicting clinical outcomes, 1 year later, via three different methods: (a) naturalistically observed psychosocial functioning (i.e., electronically activated recorder [EAR]), (b) informant-reported interpersonal functioning (i.e., Inventory of Interpersonal Problems-32), and (c) self-reported suicidality (SI), depression, anxiety, and substance use symptoms (i.e., Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire). Data were analyzed from 72 individuals in current or recent psychiatric treatment meeting diagnosis for at least one PD. Results showed that <i>DSM</i> Section II PD and AMPD ratings yielded meaningful and comparable predictions of naturalistically observed EAR variables and informant-rated interpersonal functioning. The AMPD appeared to offer slight advantages in the prediction of EAR-observed negative affect, hostile words, and informant-rated interpersonal functioning, with clearer advantages at the facet level. Overall, these results provide tentative evidence that both <i>DSM</i> Section II PD and AMPD systems show meaningful links with clinical outcomes measured via multiple methods 1 year later, but with clearer advantages for the AMPD at the facet level. Moreover, results show that the EAR is a viable method for capturing naturalistically observed clinically meaningful, in vivo behavior of individuals exhibiting maladaptive personality patterns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":74420,"journal":{"name":"Personality disorders","volume":" ","pages":"361-370"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition, personality disorders and the alternative model: Prediction of naturalistically observed behavior, interpersonal functioning, and psychiatric symptoms, 1 year later.\",\"authors\":\"William R Calabrese, Leah T Emery, Chloe M Evans, Leonard J Simms\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/per0000677\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Traditional personality disorders (PDs; e.g., <i>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition [DSM-5</i>] Section II PDs), as well as dimensional traits (e.g., alternative model for PD [AMPD]), offer unique advantages in personality pathology assessment. However, very little is known about how these systems compare in predicting observable behavior. This study compares self-report ratings of PD symptoms (i.e., Structured Clinical Interview for <i>DSM-IV</i> PD) with self-reports of AMPD traits (i.e., Personality Inventory for <i>DSM</i>-<i>5</i>) in predicting clinical outcomes, 1 year later, via three different methods: (a) naturalistically observed psychosocial functioning (i.e., electronically activated recorder [EAR]), (b) informant-reported interpersonal functioning (i.e., Inventory of Interpersonal Problems-32), and (c) self-reported suicidality (SI), depression, anxiety, and substance use symptoms (i.e., Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire). Data were analyzed from 72 individuals in current or recent psychiatric treatment meeting diagnosis for at least one PD. Results showed that <i>DSM</i> Section II PD and AMPD ratings yielded meaningful and comparable predictions of naturalistically observed EAR variables and informant-rated interpersonal functioning. The AMPD appeared to offer slight advantages in the prediction of EAR-observed negative affect, hostile words, and informant-rated interpersonal functioning, with clearer advantages at the facet level. Overall, these results provide tentative evidence that both <i>DSM</i> Section II PD and AMPD systems show meaningful links with clinical outcomes measured via multiple methods 1 year later, but with clearer advantages for the AMPD at the facet level. Moreover, results show that the EAR is a viable method for capturing naturalistically observed clinically meaningful, in vivo behavior of individuals exhibiting maladaptive personality patterns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74420,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Personality disorders\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"361-370\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Personality disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000677\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000677","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

传统的人格障碍(PD;如《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第五版 [DSM-5] 第二部分人格障碍)以及维度特质(如人格障碍替代模型 [AMPD])在人格病理学评估方面具有独特的优势。然而,人们对这些系统在预测可观察行为方面的比较却知之甚少。本研究通过三种不同的方法:(a)自然观察社会心理功能(即电子激活记录仪 [EAR]),比较了自我报告的 PD 症状评级(即 DSM-IV PD 结构化临床访谈)和自我报告的 AMPD 特征(即 DSM-5 人格量表)在预测 1 年后临床结果方面的作用;(b)自我报告的 AMPD 特征(即 DSM-5 人格量表)在预测 1 年后临床结果方面的作用;(c)自我报告的 AMPD 特征(即 DSM-5 人格量表)在预测 1 年后临床结果方面的作用、电子激活记录器 [EAR]),(b)线人报告的人际功能(即人际问题量表-32),以及(c)自我报告的自杀倾向(SI)、抑郁、焦虑和药物使用症状(即精神病诊断筛查问卷)。我们分析了 72 名正在接受或近期接受精神病治疗的患者的数据,这些患者至少被诊断患有一种 PD。结果表明,DSM 第二部分的 PD 和 AMPD 评级对自然观察到的 EAR 变量和信息提供者评定的人际功能进行了有意义且可比的预测。AMPD 似乎在预测 EAR 观察到的负面情绪、敌意言语和信息提供者评定的人际功能方面略有优势,而在面的层面上优势更为明显。总之,这些结果提供了初步证据,表明 DSM 第二部分 "帕金森病 "和 AMPD 系统与 1 年后通过多种方法测量的临床结果之间存在有意义的联系,但 AMPD 在面的层面上具有更明显的优势。此外,研究结果表明,EAR 是一种可行的方法,可用于捕捉自然观察到的具有临床意义的、表现出适应不良人格模式的个体的活体行为。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition, personality disorders and the alternative model: Prediction of naturalistically observed behavior, interpersonal functioning, and psychiatric symptoms, 1 year later.

Traditional personality disorders (PDs; e.g., Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition [DSM-5] Section II PDs), as well as dimensional traits (e.g., alternative model for PD [AMPD]), offer unique advantages in personality pathology assessment. However, very little is known about how these systems compare in predicting observable behavior. This study compares self-report ratings of PD symptoms (i.e., Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV PD) with self-reports of AMPD traits (i.e., Personality Inventory for DSM-5) in predicting clinical outcomes, 1 year later, via three different methods: (a) naturalistically observed psychosocial functioning (i.e., electronically activated recorder [EAR]), (b) informant-reported interpersonal functioning (i.e., Inventory of Interpersonal Problems-32), and (c) self-reported suicidality (SI), depression, anxiety, and substance use symptoms (i.e., Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire). Data were analyzed from 72 individuals in current or recent psychiatric treatment meeting diagnosis for at least one PD. Results showed that DSM Section II PD and AMPD ratings yielded meaningful and comparable predictions of naturalistically observed EAR variables and informant-rated interpersonal functioning. The AMPD appeared to offer slight advantages in the prediction of EAR-observed negative affect, hostile words, and informant-rated interpersonal functioning, with clearer advantages at the facet level. Overall, these results provide tentative evidence that both DSM Section II PD and AMPD systems show meaningful links with clinical outcomes measured via multiple methods 1 year later, but with clearer advantages for the AMPD at the facet level. Moreover, results show that the EAR is a viable method for capturing naturalistically observed clinically meaningful, in vivo behavior of individuals exhibiting maladaptive personality patterns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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