{"title":"探索精神病住院的人格相关性:第二节人格障碍模型与人格障碍替代模型的横截面比较。","authors":"Dominika Górska, Monika Olga Jańczak","doi":"10.1037/per0000682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Our cross-sectional study provides a head-to-head comparison of Section II and Section III of <i>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders</i>, fifth edition (DSM-5) diagnostic models of personality disorders (PDs) in identifying significant personality correlates of psychiatric hospitalization (PH). PH is an indicator of a breakdown in one's existing ability to manage mental crisis. The sample was recruited from psychiatric clinical services (<i>N = 60</i>) as well as universities and the local community (<i>N = 49</i>). We used the Structured Clinical Interview for <i>DSM-5</i> PD (SCID-5-PD) for Section II <i>DSM-5</i> diagnosis, the Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SIFS) for Criterion A and the Personality Inventory for <i>DSM-5</i> (PID-5) for Criterion B. Separate logistic regressions analyses showed high discriminative utility for all diagnostic models: the number of Section II diagnosis, level of personality functioning, and five maladaptive traits (AUC between .89 and .97). Binomial logistic regression with a forward stepwise procedure showed that Section II number of diagnoses revealed incremental utility over Criteria A and B in distinguishing between individuals experiencing a mental health crisis requiring PH and those not requiring immediate intervention. We conclude that each diagnostic model, when considered individually, exhibits a high degree of discriminatory performance. However, employing all these models concurrently for identifying personality correlates of PH proves impractical. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":74420,"journal":{"name":"Personality disorders","volume":"15 5","pages":"304-314"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring personality correlates of psychiatric hospitalization: A cross-sectional comparison of section ii personality disorder model and alternative model for personality disorders.\",\"authors\":\"Dominika Górska, Monika Olga Jańczak\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/per0000682\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Our cross-sectional study provides a head-to-head comparison of Section II and Section III of <i>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders</i>, fifth edition (DSM-5) diagnostic models of personality disorders (PDs) in identifying significant personality correlates of psychiatric hospitalization (PH). PH is an indicator of a breakdown in one's existing ability to manage mental crisis. The sample was recruited from psychiatric clinical services (<i>N = 60</i>) as well as universities and the local community (<i>N = 49</i>). We used the Structured Clinical Interview for <i>DSM-5</i> PD (SCID-5-PD) for Section II <i>DSM-5</i> diagnosis, the Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SIFS) for Criterion A and the Personality Inventory for <i>DSM-5</i> (PID-5) for Criterion B. Separate logistic regressions analyses showed high discriminative utility for all diagnostic models: the number of Section II diagnosis, level of personality functioning, and five maladaptive traits (AUC between .89 and .97). Binomial logistic regression with a forward stepwise procedure showed that Section II number of diagnoses revealed incremental utility over Criteria A and B in distinguishing between individuals experiencing a mental health crisis requiring PH and those not requiring immediate intervention. We conclude that each diagnostic model, when considered individually, exhibits a high degree of discriminatory performance. However, employing all these models concurrently for identifying personality correlates of PH proves impractical. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74420,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Personality disorders\",\"volume\":\"15 5\",\"pages\":\"304-314\"},\"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/per0000682\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000682","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
我们的横断面研究对《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5)人格障碍(PDs)诊断模型的第二部分和第三部分进行了正面比较,以确定精神病住院(PH)的重要人格相关因素。PH 是一个人处理精神危机的现有能力崩溃的指标。我们从精神科临床服务机构(60 人)、大学和当地社区(49 人)招募样本。我们使用 DSM-5 PD 结构化临床访谈(SCID-5-PD)进行 DSM-5 第二部分的诊断,使用自我和人际功能量表(SIFS)进行标准 A 的诊断,使用 DSM-5 人格量表(PID-5)进行标准 B 的诊断。分别进行的逻辑回归分析表明,所有诊断模型都具有很高的区分效用:第二部分诊断的数量、人格功能水平和五个适应不良特质(AUC 在 0.89 和 0.97 之间)。采用前向逐步法的二项式逻辑回归结果显示,第二部分的诊断次数比标准 A 和标准 B 更能区分需要接受 PH 治疗的心理健康危机患者和不需要立即干预的患者。我们的结论是,每个诊断模型在单独考虑时都具有很高的区分性能。然而,同时使用所有这些模型来识别 PH 的人格相关因素证明是不切实际的。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
Exploring personality correlates of psychiatric hospitalization: A cross-sectional comparison of section ii personality disorder model and alternative model for personality disorders.
Our cross-sectional study provides a head-to-head comparison of Section II and Section III of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5) diagnostic models of personality disorders (PDs) in identifying significant personality correlates of psychiatric hospitalization (PH). PH is an indicator of a breakdown in one's existing ability to manage mental crisis. The sample was recruited from psychiatric clinical services (N = 60) as well as universities and the local community (N = 49). We used the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 PD (SCID-5-PD) for Section II DSM-5 diagnosis, the Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SIFS) for Criterion A and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) for Criterion B. Separate logistic regressions analyses showed high discriminative utility for all diagnostic models: the number of Section II diagnosis, level of personality functioning, and five maladaptive traits (AUC between .89 and .97). Binomial logistic regression with a forward stepwise procedure showed that Section II number of diagnoses revealed incremental utility over Criteria A and B in distinguishing between individuals experiencing a mental health crisis requiring PH and those not requiring immediate intervention. We conclude that each diagnostic model, when considered individually, exhibits a high degree of discriminatory performance. However, employing all these models concurrently for identifying personality correlates of PH proves impractical. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).