Borderline personality disorder symptom networks across adolescent and adult clinical samples: examining symptom centrality and replicability

BACKGROUND

Numerous theories posit different core features to borderline personality disorder (BPD). Recent advances in network analysis provide a method of examining the relative centrality of BPD symptoms, as well as examine the replicability of findings across samples. Additionally, despite the increase in research supporting the validity of BPD in adolescents, clinicians are reluctant to diagnose BPD in adolescents. Establishing the replicability of the syndrome across adolescents and adults informs clinical practice and research. This study examined the stability of BPD symptom networks and centrality of symptoms across samples varying in age and clinical characteristics.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analyses of BPD symptoms from semi-structured diagnostic interviews from the Collaborative Longitudinal Study of Personality Disorders (CLPS), the Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Service (MIDAS) study, and an adolescent clinical sample. Network attributes, including edge (partial association) strength and node (symptom) expected influence, were compared.

RESULTS

The three networks were largely similar and strongly correlated. Affective instability and identity disturbance emerged as relatively central symptoms across the three samples, and relationship difficulties across adult networks. Differences in network attributes were more evident between networks varying both in age and in BPD symptom severity level.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings highlight the relative importance of affective, identity, and relationship symptoms, consistent with several leading theories of BPD. The network structure of BPD symptoms appears generally replicable across multiple large samples including adolescents and adults, providing further support for the validity of the diagnosis across these developmental phases.

From Pong to Pokemon Go, catching the essence of the Internet Gaming Disorder diagnosis

Taking as a starting point, this commentary proposes some issues regarding the diagnosis of Internet Gaming Disorder discussed in Kuss et al. (2016). In our opinion, the confusion in DSM-5 diagnosis could be due to the weak starting point in building the criteria. The criteria such as functional impairment and stability of the dysfunctional behavior are considered. It is suggested that avatar identification, playing motivations, and types of video games should be considered for diagnosis. The diagnostic process is highly influenced by social context and the rapid development of video game industry. The commentary ends by considering the distinction between online and offline video gaming and the critical consideration of everyday behaviors as being addictive.

Chaos and confusion in DSM-5 diagnosis of Internet Gaming Disorder: Issues, concerns, and recommendations for clarity in the field

Background The umbrella term "Internet addiction" has been criticized for its lack of specificity given the heterogeneity of potentially problematic behaviors that can be engaged in online as well as different underlying etiological mechanisms. This has led to the naming of specific online addictions, the most notable being Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD). Methods Using the contemporary literature concerning IGD and cognate topics, issues and concerns relating to the concept of IGD are examined. Results Internet addiction and IGD are not the same, and distinguishing between the two is conceptually meaningful. Similarly, the diagnosis of IGD as proposed in the appendix of the latest (fifth) edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) remains vague regarding whether or not games need to be engaged in online, stating that IGD typically involves specific Internet games, but can also include offline games, adding to the lack of clarity. A number of authors have voiced concerns regarding the viability of including the word "Internet" in IGD, and instead proposed to use the term "video gaming disorder" or simply "gaming disorder," suggesting addiction to video gaming can also occur offline. Conclusion The DSM-5 has caused more confusion than clarity regarding the disorder, reflected by researchers in the field contesting a supposedly reached consensus for IGD diagnosis.