Dahl A A
Psychiatr Dev. 1985 Summer;3(2):109-52.
Reliable concepts of borderline disorders are a prerequisite for studies of validity. Gunderson's and DSM-III's definition of Borderline personality disorder (BPD) and DSM-III's definition of Schizotypal personality disorder (SPD) fulfill these demands. The empirical evidence for descriptive, construct and predictive validity of these disorders is presented and discussed. The review concludes that BPD has descriptive validity but lacks the 2 other stronger types of validity. SPD has both descriptive and construct validity but lacks predictive validity. Various strengths and weaknesses of the empirical studies of these borderline concepts are discussed.
边缘性障碍的可靠概念是效度研究的前提条件。冈德森对边缘型人格障碍(BPD)的定义以及《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第三版(DSM-III)对分裂型人格障碍(SPD)的定义满足了这些要求。文中呈现并讨论了这些障碍在描述性、结构和预测效度方面的实证证据。该综述得出结论,BPD具有描述性效度,但缺乏另外两种更强类型的效度。SPD具有描述性和结构效度,但缺乏预测效度。文中还讨论了这些边缘性概念实证研究的各种优缺点。