Department of Psychology, Technical University Brunswick, Brunswick, Germany.
Psychopathology. 2013;46(6):396-403. doi: 10.1159/000345404. Epub 2012 Dec 14.
Although the borderline personality disorder severity index--version IV (BPDSI-IV) has already been used in several studies, psychometric properties are only known from two developing studies.
To examine item characteristics, reliability, and validity indicators, a large sample including subjects with borderline personality disorder (n = 163), a mixed psychiatric group (n = 58), and a healthy control group (n = 43) were interviewed with the German version of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (SCID-II) as well as the BPDSI-IV.
The indices for interrater reliability as well as internal consistency of the BPDSI-IV were excellent to good. The total score and the subscales of the BPDSI-IV discriminated between diagnostic subgroups. As expected, its subscales were associated with the scores in the SCID-II and applied self-rating measures.
In a subsequent version, subscales might have to be adapted to the proposed traits of the borderline type in DSM-V.
尽管边界人格障碍严重程度指数-第四版(BPDSI-IV)已在多项研究中得到应用,但仅从两项发展研究中可知其心理测量特性。
为了检查项目特征、可靠性和有效性指标,一个包括边缘性人格障碍患者(n=163)、混合精神病患者组(n=58)和健康对照组(n=43)的大样本组接受了德国版DSM-IV 人格障碍结构临床访谈(SCID-II)和 BPDSI-IV 的访谈。
BPDSI-IV 的评分者间可靠性和内部一致性指数均为优秀至良好。BPDSI-IV 的总分和分量表可区分诊断亚组。正如预期的那样,其分量表与 SCID-II 和应用的自我评定量表的评分相关。
在随后的版本中,可能需要根据 DSM-V 中提出的边界类型的特征对分量表进行调整。