University of Notre Dame.
Personal Disord. 2013 Oct;4(4):379-80. doi: 10.1037/per0000050.
Comments on the original article by Gunderson (see record 2013-45025-012). This commentary has three sections: (a) gratitude and agreements, (b) factual issues, and (c) disagreements. Clark first acknowledges potential conflicts of interest: She was a work group (WG) member for the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Clark is also the author of a trait-dimensional measure for personality disorder (PD) assessment, and she has worked for PD trait-dimensional diagnosis since 1980, when she was shocked to learn that although the third edition of the DSM (American Psychiatric Association, 1980) defined PD in terms of maladaptive traits, PD diagnosis was not based systematically on traits.
对 Gunderson 原文的评论(参见记录 2013-45025-012)。本评论有三个部分:(a)感谢和同意,(b)事实问题,(c)分歧。Clark 首先承认潜在的利益冲突:她是第五版《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》(DSM-5;美国精神病学协会,2013)工作组的成员。Clark 也是一种人格障碍(PD)评估特质-维度测量的作者,自 1980 年以来,她一直致力于 PD 特质-维度诊断,当时她震惊地发现,尽管第三版《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》(美国精神病学协会,1980)以适应不良特质来定义 PD,但 PD 诊断并不是系统地基于特质。