Deriving ICD-11 personality disorder domains from dsm-5 traits: initial attempt to harmonize two diagnostic systems.

OBJECTIVE: The personality disorder domains proposed for the ICD-11 comprise Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Dissociality, Disinhibition, and Anankastia, which are reasonably concordant with the higher-order trait domains in the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders. METHOD: We examined (i) whether designated DSM-5 trait facets can be used to describe the proposed ICD-11 trait domains, and (ii) how these ICD-11 trait features are hierarchically organized. A mixed Danish derivation sample (N = 1541) of 615 psychiatric out-patients and 925 community participants along with a US replication sample (N = 637) completed the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Sixteen PID-5 traits were designated to cover features of the ICD-11 trait domains. RESULTS: Exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) analyzes showed that the designated traits were meaningfully organized in the proposed ICD-11 five-domain structure as well as other recognizable higher-order models of personality and psychopathology. Model fits revealed that the five proposed ICD-11 personality disorder domains were satisfactorily resembled, and replicated in the independent US sample. CONCLUSION: The proposed ICD-11 personality disorder domains can be accurately described using designated traits from the DSM-5 personality trait system. A scoring algorithm for the ICD-11 personality disorder domains is provided in appendix.

Utility of DSM-5 section III personality traits in differentiating borderline personality disorder from comparison groups.

OBJECTIVE: Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a highly prevalent diagnosis in mental health care and includes a heterogeneous constellation of symptoms. As the field of personality disorder (PD) research moves to emphasize dimensional traits in its operationalization, it is important to determine how the alternative DSM-5 Section III personality trait dimensions differentiates such features in BPD patients versus comparison groups. To date, no study has attempted such validation. METHOD: The current study examined the utility of the DSM-5 trait dimensions in differentiating patients with the categorical DSM-IV/5 diagnosis of BPD (n=101) from systematically matched samples of other PD patients (n=101) and healthy controls (n=101). This was investigated using one-way ANOVA and multinomial logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Results indicated that Emotional Lability, Risk Taking, and Suspiciousness uniquely differentiated BPD patients from other PD patients, whereas Emotional Lability, Depressivity, and Suspiciousness uniquely differentiated BPD patients from healthy controls. CONCLUSION: Emotional Lability is in particular a key BPD feature of the proposed Section III model, whereas Suspiciousness also augments essential BPD features. Provided that these findings are replicated cross-culturally in forthcoming research, a more parsimonious traits operationalization of BPD features is warranted.

The stipulations of one institutional review board: a five year review.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to explore the prevalence and types of stipulations (such as clarifications or changes) required of investigators by the institutional review board (IRB) of one institution over a five year period. DESIGN: Stipulations to research proposals (n = 124) were documented from the minutes of the IRB meetings. SETTING: Community hospital. PARTICIPANTS: IRB submissions. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Number and type of IRB stipulations. RESULTS: Nineteen research submissions (15.3%) were approved without any stipulations. For the remainder, the majority of stipulations related to consent forms (74.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Consent forms appear to be at highest risk for IRB stipulations. Being aware of high risk areas before submission of research proposals may reduce the frequency of stipulations required of investigators.