Suppr超能文献

人格障碍能否在老年时得到准确评估?ICD-11 量表的差异项目功能分析。

Can personality disorder be accurately assessed in older age? A differential item functioning analysis of ICD-11 inventories.

机构信息

Personality and Psychopathology Research Group (PEPS), Department of Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium.

Clinical Centre of Excellence for Older Adults with Personality Disorders, Mondriaan Mental Health Centre, Heerlen-Maastricht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2024 Mar;39(3):e6075. doi: 10.1002/gps.6075.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The contested categorical personality disorder (PD) criteria are not well suited to inform PD diagnoses in older adults. Yet, the classification of PDs is undergoing a critical transition phase with a paradigm shift to a dimensional approach for diagnosing PDs. No special attention was given to the expression of PDs in older age when the dimensional ICD-11 model was developed. Given that PDs are highly prevalent in older adults, there is an urgent need to examine if ICD-11 related instruments are able to adequately assess for PDs in older adults.

METHODS

The age-neutrality of ICD-11 measures was examined in a sample of 208 Dutch community-dwelling adults (N = 208, M age = 54.96, SD = 21.65), matched on sex into 104 younger (age range 18-64) and 104 older (age range 65-93) adults. An instrument is considered not to be age-neutral if a collective large level of differential item functioning (DIF) exists in a group of items of an instrument (i.e., 25% or more with DIF). We therefore set out to detect possible DIF in the following ICD-11 self-report measures: the Standardized Assessment of Severity of Personality Disorder (SASPD), the Personality Inventory for ICD-11 (PiCD), and the Borderline Pattern Scale (BPS).

RESULTS

DIF analyses using a non-parametric odds ratio approach demonstrated that SASPD, PiCD, and BPS were age-neutral with less than 25% of items showing DIF. Yet, impact of DIF at scale level, examined by way of differential test functioning (DTF), indicated a DTF effect on the SASPD total score.

CONCLUSIONS

These results of age-neutrality of the PiCD and BPS are promising for measuring ICD-11 traits and the borderline pattern. Yet, the age-neutral measurement of PD severity requires further research. With a rapidly aging population, its accurate assessment across the entire adult life span, including older age, is a prerequisite for an adequate detection of PDs.

摘要

目的

有争议的特质性人格障碍(PD)诊断标准并不适合为老年人提供 PD 诊断。然而,PD 的分类正在经历一个关键的转型阶段,从诊断 PD 的分类方法向维度方法转变。在制定 ICD-11 维度模型时,并没有特别关注 PD 在老年时的表现。鉴于 PD 在老年人中非常普遍,迫切需要研究 ICD-11 相关工具是否能够在老年人中充分评估 PD。

方法

在一个由 208 名荷兰社区居住成年人组成的样本中(N=208,M 年龄=54.96,SD=21.65),按性别匹配 104 名年轻(年龄范围 18-64 岁)和 104 名年长(年龄范围 65-93 岁)成年人,检查 ICD-11 测量工具的年龄中立性。如果一个工具的一组项目中存在大量的差异项目功能(DIF),则认为该工具不是年龄中立的(即,25%或更多的项目具有 DIF)。因此,我们旨在检测以下 ICD-11 自我报告测量工具中可能存在的 DIF:人格障碍严重程度标准化评定量表(SASPD)、人格障碍检查表(PiCD)和边缘型模式量表(BPS)。

结果

使用非参数比值比方法进行 DIF 分析表明,SASPD、PiCD 和 BPS 具有年龄中立性,不到 25%的项目显示出 DIF。然而,通过差异测试功能(DTF)来检查量表水平的 DIF 影响,表明 SASPD 总分存在 DTF 效应。

结论

这些 PiCD 和 BPS 的年龄中立性结果对于测量 ICD-11 特征和边缘型模式是有希望的。然而,PD 严重程度的年龄中立测量需要进一步研究。随着人口的快速老龄化,在整个成年期,包括老年期,准确评估 PD 是充分发现 PD 的前提。

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