The ICD-11 proposals and field trials

A Bridge Between DSM-5 Section II Personality Disorder Criteria and ICD-11 Personality Disorder Trait Domains

The organization of personality pathology into trait domains (vs. specific disorders) in ICD-11 represents an important shift in personality disorder (PD) nosology. However, to facilitate clinical implementation, a bridge is needed between this system and the DSM-5 Section II system familiar to many researchers and clinicians. In this study, individual DSM-5 PD criteria were assigned to ICD-11 trait domains based on the published Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Requirements. This scoring scheme was examined empirically alongside DSM-5 PD dimensions (using SIDP ratings from the MIDAS project; N = 2,147 outpatients) in terms of descriptive properties and relations with psychosocial morbidity and functioning. Most PD criteria could be matched to at least one ICD-11 trait domain, indicating considerable cross-system continuity. However, points of incongruity are noteworthy for research and clinical applications. Results provide key information for bridging categorical and dimensional frameworks, indicating that the shift toward trait-based PD models need not be as disruptive as feared.

Obsessive-Compulsive (Anankastic) Personality Disorder in the ICD-11: A Scoping Review

Introduction: With the shift from a categorical to a dimensional model, ICD-11 has made substantial changes to the diagnosis of personality disorders (PDs), including obsessive-compulsive (anankastic) personality disorder (OCPD). The ICD-11 PD model proposes a single diagnosis of PD with specifications regarding severity and domains. However, a systematic overview of ICD-11 anankastia is lacking. In this review we address the reformulation of the OCPD diagnosis in the ICD-11, and draw comparisons with the DSM-5, with a particular focus on diagnostic validity and clinical utility. We hypothesized that the ICD-11 PD model provides a diagnostically valid and clinically useful approach to OCPD, with specific emphasis on the anankastia domain as the primary trait qualifier. Methods: Literature published from 2010 to 2020 was systematically searched using the PubMed/MEDLINE, PsychInfo, Cochrane, and Web of Sciences search engines, in order to find all articles that addressed ICD-11 anankastia. Relevant articles were collated, and themes of these articles subsequently extracted. Results: Out of the 264 publications identified, 19 articles were included in this review. Four themes were identified, namely (a) overlap of DSM-5 OCPD with the ICD-11 PD model, (b) the factorial structure of the ICD-11 PD model with respect to the anankastia domain, (c) the clinical utility of the ICD-11 PD model, and (d) comparison of the ICD-11 PD model of anankastia with the DSM-5 alternative model for OCPD. Conclusions: The ICD-11 anankastia domain overlaps with DSM-5 OCPD traits, and the factor analyses of the ICD-11 PD model further support the diagnostic validity of this domain. There is some support for the clinical utility of the ICD-11 PD model of anankastia but further studies are needed, including of its relationship to obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.

The Development of the ICD-11 Classification of Personality Disorders: An Amalgam of Science, Pragmatism, and Politics

The nomenclature of personality disorders in the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems represents the most radical change in the classification history of personality disorders. A dimensional structure now replaces categorical description. It was argued by the Working Group that only a dimensional system was consistent with the empirical evidence and, in the spirit of clinical utility, the new system is based on two steps. The first step is to assign one of five levels of severity, and the second step is to assign up to five prominent domain traits. There was resistance to this structure from those who feel that categorical diagnosis, particularly of borderline personality disorder, should be retained. After lengthy discussion, described in detail here, there is now an option for a borderline pattern descriptor to be selected as a diagnostic option after severity has been determined.

Diagnosis and classification of personality disorders: novel approaches

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update of the recent studies, which have evaluated the radical changes in personality disorder classification in DSM-5 and ICD-11.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although the DSM-5 Committee rejected the personality disorders Work Group proposal for personality disorder classification, the model was published in DSM-5 Section III. This Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) has been widely adopted by the research community resulting in multiple studies evaluating its reliability and clinical utility. The ICD-11 Personality Classification has recently been accepted by the WHO and is also receiving increasing study. Both models emphasize personality disorder severity, which most studies report is consistently linked to impairment and outcome. Both models propose five descriptive domains, which appear to capture most of the current personality disorder diagnoses, and can also be linked to disease extremes of normal personality such as the Five Factor Model.

SUMMARY

The changes in DSM-5 AMPD and ICD-11 represent a significant paradigm shift in the diagnosis of personality disorders. Early research suggests that the changes may be beneficial for clinicians and researchers. The models more closely align with the large body of literature supporting dimensional models of normal personality. The severity dimensions are consistent with the large body of evidence that personality disorder severity is a strong determinant of impairment and outcome. It remains to be seen if clinicians will use the classification to plan and predict treatment for a wide range of mental disorders.

Robert Spitzer's legacy: agreement is halfway to truth

SummaryBob Spitzer died in December 2015 but is not likely to be forgotten quickly. His Herculean task in reforming psychiatric diagnosis, mainly by the development of the third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in 1980, has been acknowledged by many, but it remains unfinished. To complete the process, we need more than good diagnostic reliability, we need better veracity.Declaration of interestNone.

ICD-11 and DSM-5 personality trait domains capture categorical personality disorders: Finding a common ground

OBJECTIVE

The five personality disorder trait domains in the proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition are comparable in terms of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism/Dissociality and Disinhibition. However, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model includes a separate domain of Anankastia, whereas the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition model includes an additional domain of Psychoticism. This study examined associations of International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition trait domains, simultaneously, with categorical personality disorders.

METHOD

Psychiatric outpatients ( N = 226) were administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders Interview and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition trait domain scores were obtained using pertinent scoring algorithms for the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Associations between categorical personality disorders and trait domains were examined using correlation and multiple regression analyses.

RESULTS

Both the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition domain models showed relevant continuity with categorical personality disorders and captured a substantial amount of their information. As expected, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model was superior in capturing obsessive-compulsive personality disorder, whereas the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition model was superior in capturing schizotypal personality disorder.

CONCLUSION

These preliminary findings suggest that little information is 'lost' in a transition to trait domain models and potentially adds to narrowing the gap between Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition and the proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model. Accordingly, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition domain models may be used to delineate one another as well as features of familiar categorical personality disorder types. A preliminary category-to-domain 'cross walk' is provided in the article.

Structure of DSM-5 and ICD-11 personality domains in Iranian community sample

AIM

Personality disorders (PD) have been deemed the most problematic diagnostic grouping in terms of validity and utility, which particularly applies to non-Western societies. The current study evaluated the structural validity of PD trait domains in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 (DSM-5) Section III and the proposed International Classification of Diseases-11 (ICD-11) in the Iranian population.

METHODS

Community-dwelling adults (n = 285; 66% women) were administered the Personality Inventory for DSM-5, whereas the proposed ICD-11 trait domains were delineated using an algorithm for Personality Inventory for DSM-5 trait facets. The five-factor organization and higher-order hierarchical structure of both models were examined using exploratory structural equation modelling analyses.

RESULTS

The five-factor exploratory structural equation modelling loadings overall resembled international findings on DSM-5 Section III traits (including Psychoticism), whereas the ICD-11 five-factor structure aligned with the proposed ICD-11 domain features (including Anankastia). Additionally, we identified a hierarchical structure from one to five factors for both models that conceptually aligned with established models of personality and psychopathology.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided initial support for the structural validity of DSM-5 and ICD-11 PD trait models in Iranian culture. Future research warrants replication in larger samples and clinical populations. Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A self-report measure for the ICD-11 dimensional trait model proposal: The personality inventory for ICD-11

Proposed for the 11th edition of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) is a dimensional trait model for the classification of personality disorder (Tyrer, Reed, & Crawford, 2015). The ICD-11 proposal consists of 5 broad domains: negative affective, detachment, dissocial, disinhibition, and anankastic (Mulder, Horwood, Tyrer, Carter, & Joyce, 2016). Several field trials have examined this proposal, yet none has included a direct measure of the trait model. The purpose of the current study was to develop and provide initial validation for the Personality Inventory for ICD-11 (PiCD), a self-report measure of this proposed 5-domain maladaptive trait model. Item selection and scale construction proceeded through 3 initial data collections assessing potential item performance. Two subsequent studies were conducted for scale validation. In Study 1, the PiCD was evaluated in a sample of 259 MTurk participants (who were or had been receiving mental health treatment) with respect to 2 measures of general personality structure: The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised and the 5-Dimensional Personality Test. In Study 2, the PiCD was evaluated in an additional sample of 285 participants with respect to 2 measures of maladaptive personality traits: The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 and the Computerized Adaptive Test for Personality Disorders. Study 3 provides an item-level exploratory structural equation model with the combined samples from Studies 1 and 2. The results are discussed with respect to the validity of the measure and the potential benefits for future research in having a direct, self-report measure of the ICD-11 trait proposal. (PsycINFO Database Record

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.