A Psychometric Analysis of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders Module I (SCID-5-AMPD-I): Level of Personality Functioning Scale

Conceptualizing adult ADHD with the DSM alternative model of personality disorder

Personality traits and personality disorders are related to ADHD and indicate dysfunction in clinical populations. The goals of this study were to examine how the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) a) indicates the presence of ADHD and b) communicates information about dysfunction over and above ADHD diagnosis. A sample of 330 adult psychiatric patients with and without ADHD (60% female; mean age 33 years) were assessed for ADHD symptoms, personality impairment, maladaptive personality traits, and functional life impairment domains. The maladaptive personality domain Disinhibition and particularly the lower order facet of Distractibility distinguished between individuals with psychiatric difficulties with and without ADHD. Distractibility is strongly related to the ADHD symptom dimension Inattentiveness, and Antagonism to Hyperactivity/impulsivity. General personality impairment augmented ADHD diagnosis in predicting life impairments. The AMPD has utility in ADHD assessments for diagnosis and prognosis.

First Psychometric Evaluation of the English Version of the Semi-Structured Interview for Personality Functioning (STiP-5.1)

The Alternative Model for Personality Disorders provides a dimensional framework for the conceptualization of personality disorders where Criterion A concerns the assessment of one's level of personality functioning (LPF). This study examines the psychometric properties of the English translation of the Semi-Structured Interview for Personality Functioning (STiP-5.1) to validate this translation for the assessment of LPF in English-speaking populations; and examine whether this measure increments self-report measures of LPF and personality pathology in predicting general functioning. The sample consisted of 129 emerging adults between 18 and 25 years of age (M = 20.54, SD = 2.08) from a mixed college and clinical sample. Results support a unidimensional factor structure of the STiP-5.1, good internal consistency, and high inter-rater reliability. Construct validity was supported through associations of the STiP-5.1 with self-report measures of LPF and personality pathology. The STiP-5.1 incremented self-report measures of personality pathology in predicting functional impairment, though additional variance explained was modest. Finally, STiP-5.1 scores differentiated individuals who obtained a score at or above the clinical cutoff from those below on self-report measures of personality pathology and LPF with large effect sizes. Findings support the validity of the English translation of the STiP-5.1 for the assessment of LPF.

The Structure of Identity Dysfunction in Self-Report Measures

Identity dysfunction is considered core to psychopathology, contributing to emotional and interpersonal problems across psychiatric diagnoses. Despite its centrality in theories of personality and psychopathology, the empirical research on the structure of identity dysfunction is fragmented by a plethora of self-report measures assessing varied domains of identity dysfunction. This project examines conceptual domains of identity dysfunction in self-report assessments, with the goal of elucidating a clear structure of identity dysfunction to advance both theory and measurement. Toward this aim, we a) investigate the factor structure of identity dysfunction in existing self-report measures, using exploratory factor analysis and b) examine relationships between identity dysfunction and closely related constructs, using exploratory structural equation modeling. We assess responses from 632 young adults to 17 commonly used identity functioning self-report measures. In a series of exploratory factor analyses, we identified four content-domains of Identity Dysfunction (Self-Alienation, Susceptibility to External Influence, Self-Dysregulation, and Contingent Self-Esteem) and three content domains of Identity Clarity (Self-Consistency, Reflective Functioning, and Authentic Living). These content domains were largely well-represented by a single factor. In a series of exploratory structural equation models, emergent factors related similarly to personality, emotion dysregulation, and values and problems in interpersonal relationships.

Replicability of the five-factor structure of DSM-5 and ICD-11 trait systems and their associations with binge eating and bipolar spectrum psychopathology

Since the research on contemporary personality models-and psychopathology-mainly originate from the Western world, we aimed to test the factorial structure of two trait systems assessed with the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) in a non-Western sample and to compare the extracted models' relative associations with binge eating disorder (BED) and bipolar spectrum disorder (BSD) symptoms. A community sample (N = 516; 72% female) was administered the PID-5, which can operationalize both the DSM-5 and ICD-11 systems. The factor structures of both systems were tested using exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM). The congruence coefficients of all factor loadings with international studies were calculated. The Binge Eating Scale (BES), Bipolar Spectrum Diagnostic Scale (BSDS), and Hypomania Checklist-32-Revised (HCL-32) were used to measure the criterion variables. Linear regression models were used for comparing the DSM-5 and ICD-11 systems in predicting the BED and BSD. The findings supported five-factor solutions for both trait systems. Both systems significantly predicted dimensional measures of both BED and BSD (all p < 0.001). The present findings support an acceptable five-factor structure for both personality systems in the non-Western sample. Different algorithms of maladaptive domains on both systems are related to binge eating and bipolar spectrum psychopathology.

Differentiation of Self and Interpersonal Functioning with the Level of Personality Functioning Scale - Brief Form 2.0

Research on Criterion A of the alternative model for personality disorders is recently expanding and provides mixed results concerning the unidimensional operational definition of severity by the model, characterized by impaired self (identity and self-direction) and interpersonal (empathy and intimacy) functioning. Studies resulted in one, as well as two or more factor structures. The present study demonstrated the importance of the structural and relational differentiation of self and interpersonal dimensions of personality functioning. One thousand seventy-four participants (community and clinical mixed sample) completed the Level of Personality Functioning Scale - Brief Form 2.0 (LPFS-BF 2.0), the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Short Form and the Questionnaire for the World Health Organization Disability Assessment. An LPFS-BF 2.0 two-factor structure with self and interpersonal functioning factors was corroborated by confirmatory factor analyses and bifactor modeling. Joint Exploratory Factor Analysis of the LPFS-BF 2.0 domains with maladaptive personality domains clearly differentiated the personality functioning factors. While the self-functioning factor was more closely linked to negative affect (and to disinhibition and psychoticism), the interpersonal functioning factor connected to detachment. Self-functioning predicted functional impairment along and beyond personality domains. The LPFS-BF 2.0 appears a useful tool for clinical routine monitoring of both self and interpersonal functioning.

Personality disorders: the impact of severity on societal costs

Personality disorders (PDs) are associated with high levels of societal costs. However, previous research has found limited or no evidence of unique contributions of individual PD categories on the overall level of societal costs. Recent research supports the validity of PD as a dimensional construct, and PD severity may be a better predictor of societal costs than specific PD categories. The aim of this study was to explore if PD severity could predict the level of societal costs among treatment-seeking patients with PDs, while controlling for the impact of comorbid mental health and substance use disorders. Four different severity indicators were explored: the number of PDs, the total number of PD criteria, the number of BPD criteria, and the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS) from the alternative model in DSM-5. Participants (n = 798/794) were retrieved from the quality register of the Norwegian Network for Personality Disorders for the period 2017-2020. Societal costs were assessed using a structured interview covering the six-month period prior to assessment. Diagnoses and diagnostic criteria were determined using a semi-structured diagnostic interview (SCID-5-PD and M.I.N.I), and the LPFS was assessed by the LPFS-Brief Form 2.0 (LPFS-BF 2.0) questionnaire. Statistics included multiple regression analyses. None of the severity indicators were significant predictors of overall societal costs among treatment-seeking patients, and effect sizes were small.

Do Flexible Administration Procedures Promote Individualized Clinical Assessments? An Explorative Analysis of How Clinicians Utilize the Funnel Structure of the SCID-5-AMPD Module I: LPFS

The current study examined clinicians' utilization of the SCID-5-AMPD-I funnel structure. Across 237 interviews, conducted as part of the NorAMP study, we found that clinicians administered on average 2-3 adjacent levels under each subdomain, effectively administering only about 50% of available items. Comparing administration patterns of interviews, no two interviews contained the exact same set of administered items. On average, when comparing individual interviews, only about half of the administered items in each interview were administered in both interviews. Cross-classified mixed effects models were estimated to examine the factors affecting item administration. Results indicated that the interplay between patient preliminary scores and item level had a substantial impact on item administration, suggesting clinicians tend to administer items corresponding to expected patient severity. Overall, our findings suggest clinicians utilize the SCID-5-AMPD-I funnel structure to conduct efficient and individually tailored assessments informed by relevant patient characteristics. Adopting similar non-fixed administration procedures for other interviews could potentially provide similar benefits compared to traditional fixed-form administration procedures. The current study can serve as a template for verifying and evaluating future adoptions of non-fixed administration procedures in other interviews.

Improvement of personality functioning among people treated within personality disorder mental health services. A longitudinal, observational study

Objective

Evidence-based personality disorder (PD) treatments are dominated by interventions targeting Borderline PD, although clinical populations characteristically include different PD features and severity. Personality functioning is a new concept intended to capture common features across PDs. This study aimed to investigate longitudinal improvement of personality functioning in a clinical sample assigned to PD treatment.

Method

An observational, large, longitudinal study of patients in PD treatments on specialist mental health service levels (N = 1,051). DSM-5 PDs were systematically assessed on referral. Personality functioning was repeatedly assessed (LPFS-BF-2.0), supplemented by symptom distress (anxiety: PHQ-GAD-7, depression: PHQ-9), and social/occupational activity (WSAS, work/study activity). Statistics were linear mixed models.

Results

Thirty per cent had personality difficulties below PD threshold. Among PDs, 31% had Borderline (BPD), 39% Avoidant (AvPD), 15% not otherwise specified, 15% other PDs, and 24% > one PD. More severe initial LPFS-BF was associated with younger age, presence of PD and increasing number of total PD criteria. Across PD conditions, LPFS-BF, PHQ-9 and GAD-7 improved significantly (overall effect size 0.9). Mean duration of PD treatment was 15 (SD 9) months. Drop-out rates were low (12%). LPFS-BF improvement-rates were higher for BPD. Younger age was moderately associated with slower PHQ-9 improvement. Work/study activity was initially poor, poorer levels associated with AvPD and younger age, and improvement was non-significant across PD conditions. AvPD was associated with slower WSAS improvement-rates.

Conclusion

Personality functioning improved across PD conditions. The results highlight BPD improvements. The study points to challenges concerning AvPD treatment, poor occupational activity and age-related differences.

Comparing Measures of Criterion A to Better Understand Incremental Validity in the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders

The Alternative Model of Personality Disorders distinguishes between the severity of personality dysfunction (Criterion A) and individual differences in personality disorder expression (Criterion B). Several Criterion A measures exist, but few studies have compared these measures with each other. Moreover, debates about whether the constructs of Criteria A and B are redundant (i.e., weak incremental validity) should be framed around how different Criterion A measures perform relative to others. This study of 204 undergraduate students evaluated multiple measures of Criterion A. These measures were strongly correlated with Criterion B, but evidenced incremental validity (39% of outcomes, 5% average additional variance explained) with outcomes of psychopathology and interpersonal impairments, and less consistent incremental validity with suicidality, aggression, and mental health utilization. We discuss how these results inform the construct of Criterion A relative to Criterion B and evaluate strengths/weaknesses of Criterion A measures.

Empirical Priors in Polytomous Computerized Adaptive Tests: Risks and Rewards in Clinical Settings

The use of empirical prior information about participants has been shown to substantially improve the efficiency of computerized adaptive tests (CATs) in educational settings. However, it is unclear how these results translate to clinical settings, where small item banks with highly informative polytomous items often lead to very short CATs. We explored the risks and rewards of using prior information in CAT in two simulation studies, rooted in applied clinical examples. In the first simulation, prior precision and bias in the prior location were manipulated independently. Our results show that a precise personalized prior can meaningfully increase CAT efficiency. However, this reward comes with the potential risk of overconfidence in wrong empirical information (i.e., using a precise severely biased prior), which can lead to unnecessarily long tests, or severely biased estimates. The latter risk can be mitigated by setting a minimum number of items that are to be administered during the CAT, or by setting a less precise prior; be it at the expense of canceling out any efficiency gains. The second simulation, with more realistic bias and precision combinations in the empirical prior, places the prevalence of the potential risks in context. With similar estimation bias, an empirical prior reduced CAT test length, compared to a standard normal prior, in 68% of cases, by a median of 20%; while test length increased in only 3% of cases. The use of prior information in CAT seems to be a feasible and simple method to reduce test burden for patients and clinical practitioners alike.

The Incremental Utility of Criteria A and B of the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders for Predicting DSM-IV/DSM-5 Section II Personality Disorders

The DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) includes two main criteria: moderate or greater impairment in personality functioning (Criterion A) and the presence of one or more pathological personality traits (Criterion B). The aim of the study was to investigate the incremental utility of Criteria A and B for predicting DSM-5 Section II personality disorders (PD). The sample (N = 317) consisted of three well-defined groups: non-clinical participants (n = 35), psychiatric patients with PD (n = 193), and without PD (n = 83). All were assessed using the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders Module I (SCID-5-AMPD-I): Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS), and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Logistic regression analyses showed that the SCID-5-AMPD-I could predict the presence of PDs in general, and the three specific PDs that were investigated (i.e., Antisocial, Borderline, and Avoidant PDs). The PID-5 domains enhanced prediction of the specific PDs, but not the presence of PDs in general, when entered in the second step. Our results support the AMPD model: Criterion A predicted the presence of DSM-5 Section II PDs in general, whereas measures of Criterion B incremented prediction of Antisocial, Borderline, and Avoidant PDs.

The Norwegian network for personality disorders - development, contributions and challenges through 30 years

BACKGROUND

Established in 1992, the Norwegian Network for Personality Disorders (The Network) is a clinical research collaboration of specialist mental health and addiction services in Norway. Its primary focus is to facilitate systematic and relevant clinical assessment for patients with personality disorder and evaluate progress in psychotherapeutic treatment. However, large-scale data registers for personality disorder are still unique. This article presents the circumstances that led to the establishment of the Network, and its development and challenges in many areas, and through various phases.

METHODS

In the following, we will outline how this close interaction between researchers, clinicians, and well-adapted systems has facilitated cooperation and clinical research. We will highlight some key factors that have been decisive during the network's development, and not least for further adaptation and existence.

RESULTS

Through 30 years, the Network has succeeded in establishing a large and sustainable clinical research collaboration with a persistent focus on personality disorder and psychotherapeutic treatment. The collaboration has resulted in a broad range of scientific contributions to the understanding of personality disorder, assessment and measurement methods, treatment alliance, clinical outcomes, service utilization, and costs. In addition, The Network has also resulted in a number of synergy effects that have benefited clinicians, patients, and researchers.

CONCLUSIONS

The Norwegian Network for Personality Disorders has become an acknowledged institution in the field. Many aspects of its development, organization, maintenance, and solutions to challenges may be relevant to others who plan to establish, maintain, or further develop similar collaborations.

Analysis of the interaction between personality dysfunction and traits in the statistical prediction of physical aggression: Results from outpatient and community samples

The Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD), included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.) and the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (11th ed.; ICD-11) are, respectively, hybrid categorical-dimensional and dimensional frameworks for personality disorders (PDs). Both models emphasize personality dysfunction and personality traits. Previous studies investigating the links between the AMPD and ICD-11, and self-reported physical aggression have mostly focused on traits and did not take into account the potential interaction between personality dysfunction and traits. Thus, the aim of this study is to identify dysfunction*trait interactions using regression-based analysis. Outpatients with personality disorder from a specialized public clinic (N = 285) and community participants (N = 995) were recruited to complete self-report questionnaires. Some small-size, albeit significant and clinically/conceptually meaningful personality dysfunction*trait interactions were found to predict physical aggression in both samples. Interaction analyses might further inform, to some degree, about the current discussion pertaining to the potential redundancy between dysfunction and traits, the optimal personality dysfunction structure (in the case of the AMPD), as well as clinical assessment based on AMPD/ICD-11 PD frameworks.

Norwegian Clinicians' Experiences of Learnability and Usability of SCID-II, SCID-5-PD and SCID-5-AMPD-I Interviews: A Sequential Multi-Group Qualitative Approach

The DSM-5 presents two competing diagnostic frameworks for personality disorders: the standard categorical model and the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD). The AMPD was initially criticized for being too complex and theory laden for clinical implementation. Though inter-rater reliability studies have contested initial claims of the model's complexity, little attention has been paid to how clinicians experience the usability and learnability of either model. We interviewed twenty Norwegian clinicians about their experiences with either the SCID-II/5-PD (n = 9), SCID-5-AMPD-I (n = 8), or both (n = 3). Separate thematic analyses were conducted for SCID-II/5-PD and SCID-5-AMPD-I groups, and group themes were compared. We identified four themes for each group, relating to required skills, training, challenges and information gained through the interview. We found that training and clinical experience were considered to be important for both interviews. Moreover, the SCID-5-AMPD-I was considered to rely more explicitly on theory specific to the development and content of the AMPD model in general and the LPFS specifically We also identified shared and unique challenges and shortcomings of each interview. We comment on how our findings relate to the debate surrounding the AMPD, and recommend development of clear training guidelines for both interviews.