• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版修订版(DSM-IV-TR)与《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5)人格障碍诊断模型之间的趋同:建立诊断阈值策略的评估

Convergence between DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 diagnostic models for personality disorder: evaluation of strategies for establishing diagnostic thresholds.

作者信息

Morey Leslie C, Skodol Andrew E

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.

出版信息

J Psychiatr Pract. 2013 May;19(3):179-93. doi: 10.1097/01.pra.0000430502.78833.06.

DOI:10.1097/01.pra.0000430502.78833.06
PMID:23653075
Abstract

The Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) recommended substantial revisions to the personality disorders (PDs) section of DSM-IV-TR, proposing a hybrid categorical-dimensional model that represented PDs as combinations of core personality dysfunctions and various configurations of maladaptive personality traits. Although the DSM-5 Task Force endorsed the proposal, the Board of Trustees of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) did not, placing the Work Group's model in DSM-5 Section III ("Emerging Measures and Models") with other concepts thought to be in need of additional research. This paper documents the impact of using this alternative model in a national sample of 337 patients as described by clinicians familiar with their cases. In particular, the analyses focus on alternative strategies considered by the Work Group for deriving decision rules, or diagnostic thresholds, with which to assign categorical diagnoses. Results demonstrate that diagnostic rules could be derived that yielded appreciable correspondence between DSM-IV-TR and proposed DSM-5 PD diagnoses-correspondence greater than that observed in the transition between DSM-III and DSM-III-R PDs. The approach also represents the most comprehensive attempt to date to provide conceptual and empirical justification for diagnostic thresholds utilized within the DSM PDs.

摘要

《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM - 5)的人格与人格障碍工作组建议对DSM - IV - TR中的人格障碍(PDs)部分进行大幅修订,提出了一种混合分类维度模型,将人格障碍表示为核心人格功能障碍与适应不良人格特质的各种组合。尽管DSM - 5工作组认可了该提议,但美国精神病学协会(APA)董事会并未认可,于是该工作组的模型被置于DSM - 5第三部分(“新兴测量与模型”)中,与其他被认为需要更多研究的概念放在一起。本文记录了在一个由熟悉病例的临床医生描述的337名患者的全国样本中使用这种替代模型的影响。特别是,分析集中在工作组考虑的用于推导决策规则或诊断阈值的替代策略上,这些规则或阈值用于进行分类诊断。结果表明,可以得出诊断规则,这些规则在DSM - IV - TR和提议的DSM - 5人格障碍诊断之间产生了相当程度的对应——这种对应程度大于在DSM - III和DSM - III - R人格障碍转变中所观察到的。该方法也是迄今为止为DSM人格障碍中使用的诊断阈值提供概念和实证依据的最全面尝试。

相似文献

1
Convergence between DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 diagnostic models for personality disorder: evaluation of strategies for establishing diagnostic thresholds.《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版修订版(DSM-IV-TR)与《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5)人格障碍诊断模型之间的趋同:建立诊断阈值策略的评估
J Psychiatr Pract. 2013 May;19(3):179-93. doi: 10.1097/01.pra.0000430502.78833.06.
2
Personality disorder types proposed for DSM-5.DSM-5 中提出的人格障碍类型。
J Pers Disord. 2011 Apr;25(2):136-69. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2011.25.2.136.
3
The Five-Factor Model of personality disorder and DSM-5.人格障碍的五因素模型与 DSM-5
J Pers. 2012 Dec;80(6):1697-720. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00771.x.
4
Dimensional personality traits and the prediction of DSM-IV personality disorder symptom counts in a nonclinical sample.非临床样本中的维度人格特质与DSM-IV人格障碍症状计数的预测
J Pers Disord. 2005 Feb;19(1):53-67. doi: 10.1521/pedi.19.1.53.62180.
5
Relating DSM-5 section III personality traits to section II personality disorder diagnoses.将《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第5版第三部分的人格特质与第二部分的人格障碍诊断相关联。
Psychol Med. 2016 Feb;46(3):647-55. doi: 10.1017/S0033291715002226. Epub 2015 Oct 30.
6
Comparing methods for scoring personality disorder types using maladaptive traits in DSM-5.比较使用 DSM-5 中的适应不良特征对人格障碍类型进行评分的方法。
Assessment. 2013 Jun;20(3):353-61. doi: 10.1177/1073191113486182. Epub 2013 Apr 15.
7
Personality in DSM-5: helping delineate personality disorder content and framing the metastructure.DSM-5 中的人格:帮助描绘人格障碍内容并构建亚结构。
J Pers Assess. 2011 Jul;93(4):325-31. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2011.577478.
8
Is there adequate empirical justification for radically revising the personality disorders section for DSM-5?是否有足够的经验证据支持对 DSM-5 的人格障碍部分进行彻底修订?
Personal Disord. 2012 Oct;3(4):444-57. doi: 10.1037/a0022108. Epub 2011 Apr 18.
9
The structure of axis II disorders in adolescents: a cluster- and factor-analytic investigation of DSM-IV categories and criteria.青少年轴II障碍的结构:对《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版类别及标准的聚类分析和因素分析研究
J Pers Disord. 2005 Aug;19(4):440-61. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2005.19.4.440.
10
The ironic fate of the personality disorders in DSM-5.DSM-5 中人格障碍的讽刺命运。
Personal Disord. 2013 Oct;4(4):342-9. doi: 10.1037/per0000029.

引用本文的文献

1
Diagnostic accuracy of severity measures of ICD-11 and DSM-5 personality disorder: clarifying the clinical landscape with the most up-to-date evidence.《国际疾病分类第11版》(ICD - 11)和《精神疾病诊断与统计手册第5版》(DSM - 5)人格障碍严重程度测量的诊断准确性:用最新证据厘清临床现状
Front Psychiatry. 2023 May 30;14:1209679. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1209679. eCollection 2023.
2
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, alternative model conceptualization of borderline personality disorder: A review of the evidence.《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第五版边缘型人格障碍的替代模型概念化:证据回顾。
Personal Disord. 2022 Jul;13(4):402-406. doi: 10.1037/per0000563.
3
Borderline personality disorder diagnosis in a new key.
边缘性人格障碍诊断的新关键。
Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2019 Dec 2;6:18. doi: 10.1186/s40479-019-0116-1. eCollection 2019.
4
A Brief but Comprehensive Review of Research on the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders.DSM-5 人格障碍替代模型研究的简要但全面的综述。
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2019 Aug 13;21(9):92. doi: 10.1007/s11920-019-1079-z.
5
Borderline personality disorder and self-directed violence in a sample of suicidal army soldiers.边缘型人格障碍与自杀的军人样本中的自我指向性暴力。
Psychol Serv. 2021 Feb;18(1):104-115. doi: 10.1037/ser0000369. Epub 2019 Jun 10.
6
Psychological Assessment with the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders: Tradition and Innovation.人格障碍替代模型下的心理评估:传统与创新
Prof Psychol Res Pr. 2017 Apr;48(2):79-89. doi: 10.1037/pro0000071.
7
Assessing inter-model continuity between the Section II and Section III conceptualizations of borderline personality disorder in DSM-5.评估 DSM-5 中第二部分和第三部分边缘型人格障碍概念之间的模型间连续性。
Personal Disord. 2018 May;9(3):290-296. doi: 10.1037/per0000243. Epub 2017 Mar 2.
8
Continuity between DSM-5 Categorical Criteria and Traits Criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder.《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版中边缘型人格障碍的分类标准与特质标准之间的连续性。
Can J Psychiatry. 2016 Aug;61(8):489-94. doi: 10.1177/0706743716640756. Epub 2016 Mar 18.
9
The Brave New World of Personality Disorder-Trait Specified: Effects of Additional Definitions on Coverage, Prevalence, and Comorbidity.人格障碍特质明确化的全新世界:附加定义对涵盖范围、患病率及共病情况的影响
Psychopathol Rev. 2015;2(1):52-82. doi: 10.5127/pr.036314.
10
Personality disorders in DSM-5: emerging research on the alternative model.DSM-5 中的人格障碍:替代模型的新兴研究。
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2015 Apr;17(4):558. doi: 10.1007/s11920-015-0558-0.