Preliminary Scales for ICD-11 Personality Disorder: Self and Interpersonal Dysfunction Plus Five Personality Disorder Trait Domains

Prioritization of Psychopathological Symptoms and Clinical Characterization in Psychiatric Diagnoses: A Narrative Review

Importance

Psychiatry mainly deals with conditions that are mediated by brain function but are not directly attributable to specific brain abnormalities. Given the lack of concrete biological markers, such as laboratory tests or imaging results, the development of diagnostic systems is difficult.

Observations

This narrative review evaluated 9 diagnostic approaches. The validity of the DSM and the International Classification of Disorders (ICD) is limited. The Research Domain Criteria is a research framework, not a diagnostic system. The clinical utility of the quantitatively derived, dimensional Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology is questionable. The Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual Version 2 follows psychoanalytic theory and focuses on personality. Unlike the personality assessments in ICD-11 or DSM-5's alternative model, based on pathological extremes of the big 5 traits (extraversion, agreeableness, openness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism), it lacks foundation in empirical evidence. Network analytic approaches are intriguing, but their complexity makes them difficult to implement. Staging would be easier if individually predictive biological markers were available. The problem with all these new approaches is that they abstract patient experiences into higher-order constructs, potentially obscuring individual symptoms so much that they no longer reflect patients' actual problems.

Conclusions and Relevance

ICD and DSM diagnoses can be questioned, but the reality of psychopathological symptoms, such as hallucinations, depression, anxiety, compulsions, and the suffering stemming from them, cannot. Therefore, it may be advisable to primarily describe patients according to the psychopathological symptoms they present, and any resulting personal syndromes, embedded in a framework of contextual clinical characterization including personality assessment and staging. The DSM and ICD are necessary for reimbursement, but they should be simplified and merged. A primarily psychopathological symptoms-based, clinical characterization approach would be multidimensional and clinically useful, because it would lead to problem-oriented treatment and support transdiagnostic research. It should be based on a universally used instrument to assess psychopathology and structured clinical characterization.

General and distinct correspondence between personality disorder and interpersonal functioning

The alternative model of personality disorders (AMPD) in DSM-5 includes interpersonal dysfunction as a core construct as a global severity dimension. However, it is less known how various interpersonal characteristics contribute to both general and distinct dimensions of personality dysfunction. In participants from community sources, we obtained responses to Levels of Personality Functioning Scale-Self Report (LPFS-SR), maladaptive traits (PID-5-BF), and social relationship patterns, including those related to close relationships and quantitative measures of network size. Canonical correlation analysis mapped conjoint associations between two sets of variables (personality scales and social relationship) and identified three distinct modes of correlation as significant. The first canonical pattern represented global dysfunction and was associated with utilitarianism, short-termed, weaker strengths, and smaller network sizes. The second canonical correlation represented externalizing traits and was associated with a larger number of relationships, higher utilitarianism, and short-term relationships with a close significant other. The third canonical correlation represented a detached, unemotional, and callous personality which corresponded with weaker relationship strength with both the mother and a close significant other. Our findings suggest that interpersonal functioning corresponding to personality dysfunction can be distinguished into both common and specific characteristics and further highlight the importance of characterizing distinct patterns within close relationships.

Self-Reported ICD-11 Personality Disorder Severity in Peruvian Adolescents: Structure, Validity, and Tentative Cutoffs

Personality disorder (PD) is particularly common in adolescents, which underscores the significance of early screening, diagnosis, and intervention. To date, the definition of PD in the new ICD-11 has not yet been investigated in adolescents. This study therefore aimed to investigate the unidimensionality and criterion validity of self-reported ICD-11 PD features in Peruvian adolescents using the Personality Disorder Severity ICD-11 (PDS-ICD-11) scale. A total of 1,073 students (63% female; age range 12-16 years) were administered the PDS-ICD-11 scale along with criterion measures of personality pathology and symptom distress. The PDS-ICD-11 score showed adequate unidimensionality and conceptually meaningful associations with external criterion variables. The findings indicate that ICD-11 PD features, as measured with the PDS-ICD-11 scale, are structurally and conceptually sound when employed with adolescents. Norm-based cutoffs derived from the present study may be used for clinical interpretation. The PDS-ICD-11 may be employed as an efficient screening tool for personality dysfunction in adolescents.

Internal consistency of measures for ICD-11 personality disorder severity and traits: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A number of measures and scales have been developed for the ICD-11 personality disorder (PD) diagnosis, including severity and trait dimensions. The present systematic review and meta-analysis sought to evaluate the internal consistency of these measures across different populations and cultures. A systematic search was conducted across four databases where relevant studies were subjected to explicit eligibility criteria resulting in 49 included studies and 370 effect sizes. Study characteristics were tabulated, their methodological quality was evaluated, and findings were synthesized using random effects meta-analysis. Findings overall indicated that measures of ICD-11 PD severity and trait domains have adequate levels of internal consistency (α/ω = 0.82, 95% CI [0.81; 0.83], I2 = 97.3%). Aspects such as sample, country, language, format, and measured construct were significant sources of variation. Additional meta-analyses revealed that some measures performed better than others for certain dimensions. Internal consistency was overall supported across ICD-11 measures of severity and trait domains. Future research should further investigate the interrater reliability, test-retest reliability and stability, and alignment with interview-based PD diagnoses.

The sensitivity of the ICD-11 trait model to the symptoms of clinical disorders in young adults

Hierarchical psychopathology contributes to providing a broader picture of the links between emerging personality structures such as the DSM-5/ICD-11 trait models and clinical disorders. The present study aimed to predict the specific and general clinical symptoms by the less studied constructs of the ICD-11 model (negative affectivity, detachment, dissociality, disinhibition, and anankastia). Data from 642 young adults from Iran (63% female, 18-34 years) were collected by three mental symptom scales and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), which was recently used to harmonize the constructs of the DSM-5 and ICD-11 trait models. Multiple linear regressions showed that the ICD-11 model significantly predicted both the specific clinical symptoms (ranging from R2 = 0.15 to 0.40) and the general factor of clinical symptoms extracted by exploratory factor analysis (R2 = 0.40, all p < 0.001). Negative affectivity was the strongest construct correlated with both the specific symptoms (ranging from β = 0.36 to 0.69) and the general symptom factor (β = 0.59, all p < 0.001). Because the ICD-11 trait model is a practical structure related to the clinical psychopathology in young adults, screening for maladaptive traits can help clinicians in case formulation for diagnosis and treatment.

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.

Practical implications of ICD-11 personality disorder classifications

Personality disorders (PDs) are associated with an inferior quality of life, poor health, and premature mortality, leading to heavy clinical, familial, and societal burdens. The International Classification of Diseases-11 (ICD-11) makes a thorough, dramatic paradigm shift from the categorical to dimensional diagnosis of PD and expands the application into adolescence. We have reviewed the recent literature on practical implications, and severity and trait measures of ICD-11 defined PDs, by comparing with the alternative model of personality disorders in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), by mentioning the relevance in forensic and social concerns, and by referencing the developmental implication of life span, especially in adolescence. Study results strongly support the dimensional utility of ICD-11 PD diagnosis and application in adolescence which warrants early detection and intervention. More evidence-based research is needed along the ICD-11 PD application, such as its social relevance, measurement simplification, and longitudinal design of lifespan observation and treatment.

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Personality Disorder Severity ICD-11 (PDS-ICD-11) Clinician-Rating Form

No clinician-rating tool has formally been developed to assess the ICD-11 model of personality disorder (PD) severity. We therefore developed and evaluated the 14-item personality disorder Severity ICD-11 (PDS-ICD-11) Clinician-Rating Form. A combined sample of 195 patients was rated by mental health professionals or clinical research assistants in New Zealand using the PDS-ICD-11 Clinician-Rating Form. Responses were subjected to item-response theory analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. In a subsample, we examined interrater reliability and convergence with self- and informant-reported measures of personality impairment, dysfunction in various psychopathology domains, and traditional PD symptoms. Item-response theory and confirmatory factor analyses supported the item functioning and unidimensionality, respectively, of the PDS-ICD-11 Clinician-Rating Form. The interrater reliability was very promising (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.94, p < 0.001). PDS-ICD-11 Clinician-Rating Form scores were associated with established measures of personality dysfunction at large effect sizes. This initial development study suggests that the PDS-ICD-11 Clinician-Rating Form constitutes a psychometrically sound instrument that provides a clinically based impression of the severity of personality dysfunction according to the official ICD-11 description. More research is needed to corroborate its validity and utility, and a structured interview is warranted for diagnostic purposes. The final PDS-ICD-11 Clinician-Rating Form is included as online supporting information.

A head-to-head comparison of eight unique personality systems in predicting somatization phenomenon

BACKGROUND

If somatization is an independent personality trait, it is not clear whether it is specific to the temperament or maladaptive spectrum of personality. We aimed at the head-to-head comparison of temperament and maladaptive systems and spectra of personality to predict both somatization and somatic symptom and related disorders (SSRD).

METHODS

The samples included 257 cases with SSRD (70.8% female) and 1007 non-SSRD (64.3% female) from Western Iran. The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4 (PDQ-4), Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI), Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris, and San Diego-Autoquestionnaire (TEMPS-A), Affective and Emotional Composite Temperament Scale (AFECTS), and Positive Affect and Negative Affect Model (PANAS) was used to data collection. A somatization factor plus temperament and maladaptive spectra of personality were extracted using exploratory factor analysis. Several hierarchical linear and logistic regressions were used to test the predictive systems and spectra.

RESULTS

All personality systems jointly predict both somatization and SSRD with a slightly higher contribution for temperament systems. When the temperament and maladaptive spectra were compared, both spectra above each other significantly predicted both somatization (R2 = .407 versus .263) and SSRD (R2 = .280 versus .211). The temperament spectrum explained more variance beyond the maladaptive spectrum when predicting both the somatization factor (change in R2 = .156 versus .012) and SSRD (change in R2 = .079 versus .010).

CONCLUSION

All temperament and maladaptive frameworks of personality are complementary to predicting both somatization and SSRD. However, the somatization is more related to the temperament than the maladaptive spectrum of personality.

Structure of Pathological Personality Traits Through the Lens of the CAT-PD Model

Personality pathology is increasingly conceptualized within hierarchical, dimensional trait models. The Comprehensive Assessment of Traits Relevant to Personality Disorders (CAT-PD) is a pathological-trait measure with potential to improve on currently prevailing instruments because it has wider content coverage; however, its domain-level structure, which is of scientific and clinical interest, is not established. In this study, we investigated the structure and construct validity of the CAT-PD's domain level to facilitate wider use of the measure. We estimated five- and six-factor models with exploratory factor analysis in a pooled sample of eight independent subsamples (N = 3,987) and found that both models fit the data well; each had interpretable factors that were invariant across gender, sample type, and Black/White racial groups; and the factors had good convergent validity with other measures of maladaptive traits, Big Five personality, and interpersonal problems. Our results support the validity of the CAT-PD for assessing multiple levels of the pathological trait hierarchy.

Examining the construct validity of the Personality Assessment Questionnaire for ICD-11 (PAQ-11) personality trait domains in a community sample

The ICD-11 has a new diagnostic system for personality disorder, which includes five optional trait specifiers to characterize the diagnosed pathology. The current study evaluated the internal structure and construct validity of the Personality Assessment Questionnaire for ICD-11 (PAQ-11) personality trait domains in a US population-representative community sample. An exploratory factor analysis revealed the support for a four-factor model underlying the 17 PAQ-11 items, reflecting four of the five ICD-11 trait domains (Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Disinhibition and Anankastia). Moreover, correlation analyses revealed that the PAQ-11 domain scale scores were associated, as expected, with their counterparts from two other ICD-11 trait domain measures, as well as with traditional personality disorder scores. More broadly, the results raised questions about the structural integrity of the Dissociality domain scale, and the discriminant validity of the Disinhibition and Anankastia scales. The overall conclusion was nevertheless promising with respect to the PAQ-11 serving as a brief screening measure for the ICD-11 trait domains.

Differential Diagnosis of ICD-11 Personality Disorder and Autism Spectrum Disorder in Adolescents

The International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11) introduces fundamentally new diagnostic descriptions for personality disorder and autism spectrum disorder. Instead of the traditional categorical taxonomies, both personality disorder and autism spectrum disorder are described as being on a continuum. Accumulating research has pointed out that, in some cases, adolescents with autism spectrum disorder are at risk of being confused with having a personality disorder, which particularly applies to female adolescents. Case reports describe how adult autistic women struggled with social and identity roles as children and adolescents, using compensatory strategies such as social imitation and other types of camouflaging. Furthermore, some adolescents with autism display emotion dysregulation and self-injury. The ICD-11 recognizes that features of autism spectrum disorder may resemble features of personality disorder, but the two diagnoses have not yet been formally compared to one another. The present article therefore sought to outline and discuss the overlap and boundaries between the ICD-11 definitions of personality disorder and autism spectrum disorder and propose guiding principles that may assist practitioners in differential diagnosis with female adolescents. We specifically highlight how aspects of the self and interpersonal functioning along with emotional, cognitive, and behavioral manifestations may overlap across the two diagnoses. Restricted, repetitive, and inflexible patterns of behavior, interests, and activities are core features of autism spectrum disorder, which may be masked or less pronounced in female adolescents. Collecting a developmental history of the early presence or absence of autistic features is vital for a conclusive diagnosis, including features that are typically camouflaged in females. A number of future directions for research and clinical practice are proposed.

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.

Diagnostic accuracy of severity measures of ICD-11 and DSM-5 personality disorder: clarifying the clinical landscape with the most up-to-date evidence

With the implementation of new dimensional models of personality disorder (PD) in the DSM-5 and ICD-11, several investigators have developed and evaluated the psychometric properties of measures of severity. The diagnostic accuracy of these measures, an important cross-cultural metric that falls between validity and clinical utility, remains unclear. This study aimed to analyze and synthesize the diagnostic performance of the measures designed for both models. For this purpose, searches were carried out using three databases: Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science. Studies that presented sensitivity and specificity parameters for cut-off points were selected. There were no restrictions on the age and gender of the participants nor on the reference standard used or the settings. Study quality and synthesis were assessed using QUADAS-2 and MetaDTA software, respectively. Twelve studies were eligible covering self-reported and clinician-rated measures based on the ICD-11 and DSM-5 PD severity models. A total of 66.7% of the studies showed a risk of bias in more than 2 domains. The 10th and 12th studies provided additional metrics, resulting in a total of 21 studies for evidence synthesis. Adequate overall sensitivity and specificity (Se = 0.84, Sp = 0.69) of these measures were obtained; however, the cross-cultural performance of specific cut-off points could not be assessed due to the paucity of studies on the same measure. Evidence suggests that patient selection processes should mainly be improved (avoid case-control design), use adequate reference standards, and avoid only reporting metrics for the optimal cut-off point.

Dimensional models of personality disorders: Challenges and opportunities

Categorical models of personality disorders have been beneficial throughout psychiatric history, providing a mechanism for organizing and communicating research and treatment. However, the view that individuals with personality disorders are qualitatively distinct from the general population is no longer tenable. This perspective has amassed steady criticism, ranging from inconsequential to irreconcilable. In response, stronger evidence has been accumulated in support of a dimensional perspective that unifies normal and pathological personality on underlying trait continua. Contemporary nosology has largely shifted toward this dimensional perspective, yet broader adoption within public lexicon and routine clinical practice appears slow. This review focuses on challenges and the related opportunities of moving toward dimensional models in personality disorder research and practice. First, we highlight the need for ongoing development of a broader array of measurement methods, ideally facilitating multimethod assessments that reduce biases associated with any single methodology. These efforts should also include measurement across both poles of each trait, intensive longitudinal studies, and more deeply considering social desirability. Second, wider communication and training in dimensional approaches is needed for individuals working in mental health. This will require clear demonstrations of incremental treatment efficacy and structured public health rebates. Third, we should embrace cultural and geographic diversity, and investigate how unifying humanity may reduce the stigma and shame currently generated by arbitrarily labeling an individual's personality as normal or abnormal. This review aims to organize ongoing research efforts toward broader and routine usage of dimensional perspectives within research and clinical spaces.

Cross-walking personality disorder types to ICD-11 trait domains: An overview of current findings

The ICD-11 has adopted a classification of Personality Disorders (PD) that abolishes the established categorical PD types in favor of global severity classification with specification of individual trait domains. To facilitate and guide this profound transition, an overview of current research on empirical associations between established PD types and ICD-11 trait domains seems warranted. We identified a total of 9 relevant studies from 2018 to 2022, which were based on both clinical and community samples from U.S., China, Brazil, Denmark, Spain, Korea, and Canada. The patterns of associations with ICD-11 trait domains were systematically synthesized and portrayed for each PD type. Findings overall showed expected and conceptually meaningful associations between categorical PD types and ICD-11 trait domains, with only few deviations. Based on these findings, we propose a cross-walk for translating categorical PD types into ICD-11 trait domains. More research is needed in order to further guide continuity and translation between ICD-10 and ICD-11 PD classification in mental healthcare, including facet-level ICD-11 trait information. Moreover, the nine reviewed studies only relied on self-reported ICD-11 trait domains, which should be expanded with clinician-rated trait domains in future research. Finally, future research should also take ICD-11's essential PD severity classification into account.

Personality Disorder Diagnoses in ICD-11: Transforming Conceptualisations and Practice

Background

Until the advent of the ICD-11, classification of personality disorders was based on categorical prototypes with a long history. These prototypes, whilst familiar, were not based in the science of personality. Prototypical classifications were also complex to administer in non-specialist settings requiring knowledge of many signs and symptoms.

Method

This article introduces the new structure of ICD-11 for personality disorders, describing the different severity levels and trait domain specifiers. Case studies illustrate the main aspects of the classification.

Results

The new ICD-11 system acknowledges the fundamentally dimensional nature of personality and its disturbances whilst requiring clinicians to make categorical decisions on the presence or absence of personality disorder and severity (mild, moderate or severe). The connection between normal personality functioning and personality disorder is established by identifying five trait domain specifiers to describe the pattern of a person's personality disturbance (negative affectivity, detachment, dissociality, disinhibition, and anankastia) that connect to the Big 5 personality traits established in the broader study of personality.

Conclusions

Whilst new assessment measures have been and are in development, the success of the new system will rely on clinicians and researchers embracing the new system to conceptualise and describe personality disturbances and to utilise the classification in the investigation of treatment outcome.

Psychometric evaluation of the Estonian version of the Semi-structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1)

BACKGROUND

The DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders introduced a dimensional perspective on personality disorders. The model assesses functioning in four domains: Identity, Self-Direction, Empathy, and Intimacy. This study evaluates the psychometric properties of the Semi-Structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1) in Estonian.

METHOD

The sample consists of 131 participants: 58 from the general population and 73 from a mixed clinical sample that is further divided into a mood and anxiety disorder sample and personality disorder sample. All participants completed the STiP-5.1 interview and the Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form (LPFS-BF 2.0).

RESULTS

The Estonian STiP-5.1 interview has good internal consistency (McDonald's ω between .94-.98) and high convergent validity (correlations with LPFS-BF 2.0 above .7). Interview scores successfully differentiated the general population from the mixed clinical sample (Cohen's d = 2.68), as well as patients with personality disorder from those without (Cohen's d = 1.76). The LPFS-BF 2.0 total score differentiates the general population sample from the mixed clinical sample (Cohen's d = 1.99) but not the personality disorder sample from other clinical sample participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The properties of the Estonian STiP-5.1 replicate those of other languages, and empirically support a unified personality functioning dimension that can be meaningfully thought of as reflecting impairments in self and interpersonal functioning. Findings of this study will be discussed in the light of the ongoing debate on the dimensionality of personality pathology and the use of self-report versus interview measures for assessing personality pathology.

Examining the reliability and validity of the ICD-11 personality disorder severity diagnosis

OBJECTIVES

The International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition includes a new personality disorder diagnosis, in light of growing concerns of the categorical personality disorder diagnoses. The purpose of the current study was to examine the reliability and validity of the severity dimension of the new International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition diagnosis, through multi-method assessment.

METHOD

In a community mental health sample (n = 311), we examined the interrater reliability of the severity diagnosis and evaluated the diagnosis against self-report measures of dimensional personality pathology and psychopathology constructs and traditional categorical and informant-report measures.

RESULTS

Intraclass correlations indicated 'excellent' reliability of the diagnostic ratings. Large associations were observed between the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition clinician diagnosis and overall impairment measures. Generally, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition clinician diagnosis exhibited largest associations with measures of internalising dysfunction, and more variable associations with interpersonal and externalising impairment. The International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition clinician diagnosis showed a large association with borderline personality disorder symptom scores and moderate associations with Paranoid, Schizoid and Avoidant personality disorder scores. Similar patterns emerged of the associations between the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition personality disorder diagnosis with self-report and informant-report measures, although the associations were larger with self-report measures.

CONCLUSION

These findings provide promising initial evidence for the reliability and validity of the new International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition personality disorder diagnosis, indicating that the new conceptualisation of personality disorders may address issues within the categorical model.

Six-month stability and predictive validity of the personality inventory for ICD-11

Background

The International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11) personality disorder model comprises, among other elements, five maladaptive personality trait domains (negative affectivity, detachment, dissociality, disinhibition, anankastia). Recently, the personality inventory for ICD-11 (PiCD) has emerged as one of the most widely used measures of these ICD-11 personality trait domains.

Methods

The current study contributed to the validation of the PiCD validation by exploring its stability and predictive links with psychological distress over 6 months in a sample of 206 German community adults.

Results

The PiCD trait domain scales displayed strong differential (all r ≥ .80) and absolute stability (all |d| ≤ .09). Additionally, PiCD negative affectivity predicted depression, anxiety, and stress, and PiCD detachment predicted depression over 6 months beyond baseline.

Conclusion

In sum, this study demonstrated the stability of the PiCD trait domain scores, supporting their utility for capturing relatively stable traits as described in the ICD-11. Additionally, we provided the first evidence for the predictive validity of some of the PiCD trait domain scores.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40359-022-00979-2.

Clinical Implications of ICD-11 for Diagnosing and Treating Personality Disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The International Classification of Diseases 11th revision (ICD-11) introduced a new approach to personality disorders and related traits. This paper reviews recent literature on the assessment of ICD-11 personality disorders and implications for clinical diagnosis, decision-making, and treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

We reviewed findings on two measures developed for the ICD-11 model of personality dysfunction and six inventories for the ICD-11 trait specifiers. The psychometric qualities of these tools are promising, and they allow for both rapid screening and fine-grained assessment. Implications for clinical diagnosis and treatment of personality disorders are reviewed including utility for forensic practice. Based on evidence and our experience, we provide some recommendations for severity- and trait-informed interventions. Initial evidence supports the available instruments for assessing ICD-11 personality disorders. More research is needed including development of clinician-rating forms and diagnostic interviews as well as treatment protocols and trials based on the new ICD-11 classification.

The ICD-11 classification of personality disorders: a European perspective on challenges and opportunities

The 11th revision of the World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) includes a fundamentally new approach to Personality Disorders (PD). ICD-11 is expected to be implemented first in European countries before other WHO member states. The present paper provides an overview of this new ICD-11 model including PD severity classification, trait domain specifiers, and the additional borderline pattern specifier. We discuss the perceived challenges and opportunities of using the ICD-11 approach with particular focus on its continuity and discontinuity with familiar PD categories such as avoidant PD and narcissistic PD. The advent of the ICD-11 PD classification involves major changes for health care workers, researchers, administrators, and service providers as well as patients and families involved. The anticipated challenges and opportunities are put forward in terms of specific unanswered questions. It is our hope that these questions will stimulate further research and discussion among researchers and clinicians in the coming years.

A person-centered perspective on the combined DSM-5 AMPD/ICD-11 personality model: Utility, relationship with the categorical personality disorder model, and capacity to differentiate between levels of identity functioning

BACKGROUND

Both the ICD-11 classification of Personality Disorders and the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (DSM-5 AMPD) conceptualize personality pathology in a dimensional way, but differ in the way they carve up their respective pathological personality domains. Recently, a combination of ICD-11 and DSM-5 AMPD descriptive pathological personality traits, the Modified Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Brief Form Plus (PID5BF + M), was developed.

THE CURRENT STUDY

We investigated the utility of the additional ANANKASTIA domain (not represented in the DSM-5 AMPD) as well as of the additional PSYCHOTICISM domain (not represented in the ICD-11 model) in the identification of meaningful pathological personality domain clusters based on the PID5BF + M. Next to the classical 2- and 3-cluster solutions, we examined whether the presence of the additional ANANKASTIA domain would also gave rise to a meaningful 4-cluster solution. We then validated these clusters by investigating differences between them in mean DSM-5 Section II cluster A, B, and C personality disorder scores. Finally, we investigated whether cluster membership was able to differentiate between levels of identity functioning, a key feature of personality disorder severity in both the ICD-11 model and the DSM-5 AMPD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used a Flemish community sample of 242 participants, and applied k-means cluster analyses in a two-step manner on PID5BF + M domains to investigate 2-, 3-, and 4-cluster solutions. We used MANOVAs to examine differences between clusters in PID5BF + M domains, DSM-IV/DSM-5 Section II Assessment of Personality disorders (ADP-IV) cluster A, B, and C scores, and Self-Concept and Identity Measure (SCIM) scores.

RESULTS

Cluster analyses on PID5BF + M pathological personality domains (1) revealed meaningful 2-, 3-, and 4-cluster solutions, with the 4-cluster solution explaining the most variance in the clustering variables, (2) allowed to identify a classical Overcontrolled cluster which DSM-5 AMPD PID-5 does not, and (3) demonstrated the utility of representing ANANKASTIA and DISINHIBITON as separate pathological personality domains. PID5BF + M clusters (5) were informative of DSM-5 Section II cluster A, B, and C personality disorder scores and (6) showed different levels of clinical-developmental Identity functioning.

CONCLUSION

Current results demonstrate the utility of a combined ICD-11/DSM-5 AMPD view from a person-centered perspective.

"Self" and "other": A conceptual bridge linking normal with pathological personality

The goal of this paper is to try and close the gap between the ways in which pathological and normal personality, including their development, are conceptualized. To this end, attention is drawn to parallels that exist between the ways self-function is conceptualized in contemporary personality psychology and in recent iterations of the major psychiatric nosologies, particularly ICD-11. Conceptualizations in both normal and abnormal personality see a fundamental dichotomy between self as identity and self as socially interdependent (vs autonomous). Evidence is reviewed supporting a basic dichotomy between two categories of personality pathology that can be subsumed under the labels "Acting Out" and "Anxious-Inhibited." It is suggested that fundamental to the personality pathology subsumed under "Acting Out" is a deficient interdependent self, while a defective self-identity is proposed to underlie the personality pathology subsumed under "Anxious-Inhibited."

Severity in the ICD-11 personality disorder model: Evaluation in a Spanish mixed sample

Severity is the main component of the ICD-11 personality disorder (PD) classification, but pertinent instruments have only recently been developed. We analyzed the psychometric properties of the ICD-11 Personality Disorder Severity scale (PDS-ICD-11) in a mixed sample of 726 community and clinical subjects. We also examined how the different components of the ICD-11 PD system -five trait domains, the borderline pattern specifier, and severity, all of them measured through self-reports- are interconnected and operate together. PDS-ICD-11 properties were adequate and similar to those of the original instrument. However, regressions and factor analyses showed a considerable overlap of severity with the five personality domains and the borderline specifier (72.6%). Bifactor modeling resulted in a general factor of PD (g-PD) that was not equivalent to severity nor improved criterion validity. The whole ICD-11 PD system, i.e., five personality domains, borderline, and severity, explained an average of 43.6% of variance of external measures of well-being, disability, and clinical problems, with severity contributing 4.8%. Suggestions to further improve the ICD-11 PD taxonomy include remodeling the present definition of severity to give more weight to the real-life consequences of traits.