The structure of borderline personality disorder symptoms: a multi-method, multi-sample examination

Study Features and Response Compliance in Ecological Momentary Assessment Research in Borderline Personality Disorder: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by frequent and intense moment-to-moment changes in affect, behavior, identity, and interpersonal relationships, which typically result in significant and negative deterioration of the person's overall functioning and well-being. Measuring and characterizing the rapidly changing patterns of instability in BPD dysfunction as they occur in a person's daily life can be challenging. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a method that can capture highly dynamic processes in psychopathology research and, thus, is well suited to study intense variability patterns across areas of dysfunction in BPD. EMA studies are characterized by frequent repeated assessments that are delivered to participants in real-life, real-time settings using handheld devices capable of registering responses to short self-report questions in daily life. Compliance in EMA research is defined as the proportion of prompts answered by the participant, considering all planned prompts sent. Low compliance with prompt schedules can compromise the relative advantages of using this method. Despite the growing EMA literature on BPD in recent years, findings regarding study design features that affect compliance with EMA protocols have not been compiled, aggregated, and estimated.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic meta-analytic review aimed to investigate the relationship between study design features and participant compliance in EMA research of BPD.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted on November 12, 2021, following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and MOOSE (Meta-analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guidelines to search for articles featuring EMA studies of BPD that reported compliance rates and included sufficient data to extract relevant design features. For studies with complete data, random-effect models were used to estimate the overall compliance rate and explore its association with design features.

RESULTS

In total, 28 peer-reviewed EMA studies comprising 2052 participants were included in the study. Design features (sampling strategy, average prompting frequency, number of items, response window, sampling device, financial incentive, and dropout rate) showed a large variability across studies, and many studies did not report design features. The meta-analytic synthesis was restricted to 64% (18/28) of articles and revealed a pooled compliance rate of 79% across studies. We did not find any significant relationship between design features and compliance rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show wide variability in the design and reporting of EMA studies assessing BPD. Compliance rates appear to be stable across varying setups, and it is likely that standard design features are not directly responsible for improving or diminishing compliance. We discuss possible nonspecific factors of study design that may have an impact on compliance. Given the promise of EMA research in BPD, we also discuss the importance of unifying standards for EMA reporting so that data stemming from this rich literature can be aggregated and interpreted jointly.

Factor structure of borderline personality disorder and response to Systems Training for Emotional Predictability and Problem Solving

Differential response to the Systems Training for Emotional Predictability and Problem Solving (STEPPS) program was compared in subgroups identified through latent class analysis (LCA). STEPPS is an evidence-based group treatment program for patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). A reanalysis of data was conducted using data from a 20-week randomized controlled trial and 1-year follow-up. Subjects (n = 164) with DSM-IV BPD were assessed for comorbid Axis I and II disorders and selected clinical variables. Severity was assessed using the Zanarini Rating Scale for BPD (ZAN-BPD) and the Borderline Evaluation of Severity Over Time (BEST). Three- and four-class models were identified with the four-class model having the better fit. The latter included a high severity (HS) class (26%), an affective instability/substance abuse (AISA) class (16%), an empty/dissociation/identity disturbance (EDID) class (27%), and a low severity (LS) class (30%). High impulsiveness predicted membership in the HS class. Improvement was determined using a linear mixed-effects model. Those most likely to benefit were those in the HS group characterized by high symptom severity, Axis I and II comorbidity, problem relationships, abandonment fears, and intense anger. This work should help further efforts to match patients with treatments based on sociodemographic, diagnostic, and other illness characteristics.

BOrderliNe symptoms and suIcide-related outcomes: proTOcol for a systematic review/meta-analysis and an individual patient data meta-analysis (BONITO study)

INTRODUCTION

Prevalence of suicidal thoughts and behaviours is higher among patients with borderline personality disorder than the general population. However, evidence concerning the role of specific borderline symptoms for predicting suicide-related outcomes is lacking and no systematic review/meta-analysis (SR/MA) investigated this topic. Our aim will be to investigate the relationship between any borderline symptom (except criterion 5) and suicide-related outcomes both through an SR/MA and an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPD-MA).

METHODS

We will search PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Library databases from 1974 until September 2021. Both published and unpublished studies showing the association between any borderline symptom (except criterion 5) and suicide-related outcomes (death wish, suicidal ideation, suicidal plan, non-suicidal self-injury, deliberate self-harm, suicide attempt, suicidal behaviour disorder, suicide) will be included. Two team members will independently perform the selection of the studies and data extraction, with the supervision of two other members in case of discrepancies; and assess each study with study quality assessment tools by National Institutes of Health and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Each author will be contacted. If possible, we will perform both random-effect meta-analyses on the collected data (odds, risk, rate ratios or correlations) and an IPD-MA on collected databases.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study does not require an ethical approval. Results will be publicly disseminated, included in research presentations and published in peer-review journals.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018078696.

Attachment, Mentalization, and Criterion B of the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD)

BACKGROUND

The mentalization theory posits that interpersonal difficulties and maladaptive personality traits develop from an insecure attachment pattern with one's caregiver and corresponding deficits in mentalizing-the ability to understand others' and one's own mental states. Mentalizing deficits have been theorized as the basis for all psychopathology, with the paradigmatic case being Borderline Personality Disorder. Nevertheless, developments in the personality field indicate personality pathology is best represented dimensionally, and such a proposal was outlined by the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD). Despite evidence linking the mentalization theory to personality disorders, however, it has yet to be applied to Criterion B of the AMPD. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the moderating role of mentalizing in the relation between attachment and Criterion B maladaptive trait function in a sample of undergraduates. We hypothesized a model in which: (1) attachment insecurity would be positively associated with the Negative Affectivity, Antagonism, and Disinhibition personality domains; (2) mentalizing ability would be negatively associated with these domains; and, (3) there would be an interaction effect between attachment and mentalizing when predicting these same domains.

METHODS

Personality domains were measured dimensionally via the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5-SF), while the dependence and avoidance domains of attachment were assessed via the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ). Mentalizing ability was tapped by the Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition (MASC). The AMPD personality domains and trait facets were examined as dependent variables; attachment dependence, attachment avoidance, and overall mentalizing ability were entered as independent variables; and interaction terms between mentalizing and each attachment dimension were used to test moderation via MANCOVAs.

RESULTS

Consistent with expectations, results indicated overall mentalizing moderated the relation between attachment avoidance and Negative Affectivity. Posthoc analyses revealed similar effects on the relations between attachment avoidance and the Emotional Lability, Hostility, and Perseveration trait facets; however, there were no significant moderation findings related to attachment dependence.

CONCLUSIONS

These results support the mentalization theory's application to Criterion B of the AMPD, particularly in relation to the links between Negative Affectivity and borderline-related traits, and encourage future research of dimensional maladaptive personality. They further bolster support for understanding maladaptive personality as a dimensional construct.

Symptoms as rapidly fluctuating over time: Revealing the close psychological interconnections among borderline personality disorder symptoms via within-person structures

Despite the clinical emphasis on processes happening within individuals, investigations into the psychological, structural connections between mental health symptoms have almost exclusively analyzed differences between people. These investigations have revealed important findings; however, they do not reveal the close connections among symptoms in an individuals' psychology. This study thus examined the psychological connections between symptoms directly, using borderline personality disorder (BPD) symptoms as an example. Participants (252; 74 with BPD) reported their momentary BPD symptoms five times daily, and 165 did so again 18 months later. In support of personalized medicine (Wright & Woods, 2020), individuals' BPD symptom structures differed considerably from each other and from the between-person structure. A novel technique revealed that differences were greater than expected by chance. Within-person structures tended to exhibit more symptom granularity (more factors and lower variance explained) and differing symptom meanings (patterns of loadings). For example, some individuals exhibited close connections between relationship turmoil and identity uncertainty, whereas other individuals exhibited close connections between relationship turmoil and impulsivity. Thus, conceptions of any given person's psychopathological processes using between-person structural findings will most likely be inaccurate. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

A Recurrent Question: What Is Borderline?

The status of borderline personality disorder (BPD) as a diagnostic category is a matter of continuing controversy. In the United States, BPD is one of the most frequent diagnoses of psychiatric inpatients, and a similar tendency emerges in Europe. Nearly all theoretical aspects of BPD have been questioned, including its very position as a personality disorder. In this article, we trace the evolution of the borderline concept from the beginning of the 20th century to the current psychometric research. We argue that the status of BPD is fraught with conceptual difficulties, including an unrecognized semantic drift of major phenomenological terms (e.g., identity), a lack of general principles for the distinction of BPD and the major psychiatric syndromes (e.g., schizophrenia spectrum disorders), and insufficient definitions of key nosological concepts. These difficulties illustrate general problems in today's psychiatry that require consideration.

A Neuroscience-Oriented Research Approach to Borderline Personality Disorder

Traditionally, the study of personality disorders had been based on psychoanalytic or behavioral models. Over the past two decades, there has been an emerging neuroscience model of borderline personality disorder (BPD) grounded in the concept of BPD as a condition in which dysfunctional neural circuits underlie its pathological dimensions, some of which include emotion dysregulation (broadly encompassing affective instability, negative affectivity, and hyperarousal), abnormal interpersonal functioning, and impulsive aggression. This article, initiated at a joint Columbia University- Cornell University Think Tank on BPD with representation from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, suggests how to advance research in BPD by studying the dimensions that underlie BPD in addition to studying the disorder as a unitary diagnostic entity. We suggest that linking the underlying neurobiological abnormalities to behavioral symptoms of the disorder can inform a research agenda to better understand BPD with its multiple presentations.

Identifying core deficits in a dimensional model of Borderline Personality Disorder features: A network analysis

Researchers have proposed three core deficits of Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD): emotion dysregulation, interpersonal problems, and self-identity disturbance. Previous methods for testing these deficits rest on problematic assumptions (e.g., the assumption that observable/measured features of BPD, such as chaotic relationships and affective intensity, occur independently). A network model of psychopathology assumes that observable features of disorders directly interact, and network analytic methods quantify how central each feature is. We conducted a network analysis of core deficits of BPD features using a large (n = 4386) sample of participants with a range of BPD features. The most central features of participants in the High BPD group were loneliness, recklessness/impulsivity, and intense moods, supporting models of emotion dysregulation and interpersonal problems. The networks of BPD features did not differ between men and women. We provide directions for future research to enhance our understanding of how networks of BPD features change over time.

The current state and future of factor analysis in personality disorder research

The major debates in the personality disorder (PD) field center on the structure of personality pathology. Factor analysis is designed to elucidate the underlying structure of observed phenomena. Therefore, factor analysis has already played a major role in the debates about the structure of PD, and will continue to be an often-used and indispensable tool moving forward. However, misconceptions about the utility and interpretation of factor analyses abound. The purpose of this article is to provide a conceptual primer on available factor analytic techniques and how they have been applied in PD research, and to highlight novel ways of using factor analysis moving forward. The techniques reviewed include exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, exploratory structural equation modeling, multilevel structural equation modeling, and person-specific (i.e., P-technique) factor analysis. Additionally, the notion that exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic approaches lie on an exploratory to confirmatory spectrum is introduced. Examples from the published literature are used to illustrate key points. (PsycINFO Database Record

A Profile-Based Framework for Factorial Similarity and the Congruence Coefficient

We present a novel profile-based framework for understanding factorial similarity in the context of exploratory factor analysis in general, and for understanding the congruence coefficient (a commonly used index of factor similarity) specifically. First, we introduce the profile-based framework articulating factorial similarity in terms of 3 intuitive components: general saturation similarity, differential saturation similarity, and configural similarity. We then articulate the congruence coefficient in terms of these components, along with 2 additional profile-based components, and we explain how these components resolve ambiguities that can be-and are-found when using the congruence coefficient. Finally, we present secondary analyses revealing that profile-based components of factorial are indeed linked to experts' actual evaluations of factorial similarity. Overall, the profile-based approach we present offers new insights into the ways in which researchers can examine factor similarity and holds the potential to enhance researchers' ability to understand the congruence coefficient.

Using Negative Emotions to Trace the Experience of Borderline Personality Pathology: Interconnected Relationships Revealed in an Experience Sampling Study

While emotional difficulties are highly implicated in borderline personality disorder (BPD), the dynamic relationships between emotions and BPD symptoms that occur in everyday life are unknown. The current paper examined the function of negative emotions as they relate to BPD symptoms in real time. Experience sampling methodology with 281 participants measured negative emotions and borderline symptoms, expressed as a spectrum of experiences, five times daily for two weeks. Overall, having a BDP diagnosis was associated with experiencing more negative emotions. Multilevel modeling supported positive concurrent relationships between negative emotions and BPD symptoms. Lagged models showed that even after 3 hours negative emotions and several symptoms continued to influence each other. Therefore, results indicated that negative emotions and BPD symptoms are intricately related; some evidenced long-lasting relationships. This research supports emotion-symptom contingencies within BPD and provides insight regarding the reactivity and functionality of negative emotions in borderline pathology.

A Contingency-Oriented Approach to Understanding Borderline Personality Disorder: Situational Triggers and Symptoms

This article tested a contingency-oriented perspective to examine the dynamic relationships between in-the-moment borderline personality disorder (BPD) symptom events and in-the-moment triggers. An experience sampling study with 282 adults, including 77 participants with BPD, obtained reports of situational triggers and BPD symptom events five times daily for 2 weeks. Triggers included being rejected, betrayed, abandoned, offended, and disappointed; having one's self-concept threatened; being in a boring situation; and being alone. BPD was associated with increased situational triggers. Multilevel models revealed significant within-person associations between situational triggers and BPD symptoms for the average participant in the study, with significant individual variance in the strength and direction of trigger-symptom contingencies. Most trigger-symptom contingencies were stronger for individuals with greater borderline symptomatology, suggesting that triggers are meaningfully related to BPD. These findings highlight possible proximal mechanisms that maintain BPD and help explain the course of a disorder often described as chaotic and unpredictable.

Does assessing suicidality frequently and repeatedly cause harm? A randomized control study

Assessing suicidality is common in mental health practice and is fundamental to suicide research. Although necessary, there is significant concern that such assessments have unintended harmful consequences. Using a longitudinal randomized control design, the authors evaluated whether repeated and frequent assessments of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors negatively affected individuals, including those at-risk for suicide-related outcomes. Adults (N = 282), including many diagnosed with borderline personality disorder (BPD), were recruited through psychiatric outpatient clinics and from the community at large, and were randomly assigned to assessment groups. A control assessment group responded to questions regarding negative psychological experiences several times each day during a 2-week main observation phase. During the same observation period, an intensive suicide assessment group responded to the same questions, along with questions regarding suicidal behavior and ideation. Negative psychological outcomes were measured during the main observation phase (for BPD symptoms unrelated to suicide and for BPD-relevant emotions) and/or at the end of each week during the main observation phase and monthly for 6 months thereafter (for all outcomes, including suicidal ideation and behavior). Results revealed little evidence that intensive suicide assessment triggered negative outcomes, including suicidal ideation or behavior, even among people with BPD. A handful of effects did reach or approach significance, though these were temporary and nonrobust. However, given the seriousness of some outcomes, the authors recommend that researchers or clinicians who implement experience sampling methods including suicide-related items carefully consider the benefits of asking about suicide and to inform participants about possible risks.