Soloff P H, Ulrich R F
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1981 Jun;38(6):686-92. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1981.01780310086009.
The borderline diagnosis is widely used despite a lack of systematic research on its reliability and validity. The recent development of a structured interview incorporating diagnostic criteria for borderline disorders in a replicable format represents a necessary, but not sufficient, methodological step in testing the validity of the borderline concept. To our knowledge, this is the first replication of Gunderson's Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines in a clinical setting and population quite different from the original. Clinically defined borderline patients were compared with control groups of schizophrenic and nondelusional unipolar depressed patients. Of 29 scored statements on the diagnostic interview, borderlines differed significantly from schizophrenics on 19, from depressives on 16, and from both on 19. Stepwise discriminant-function analyses of borderline vs each comparison group gave substantial support to the reliability of the interview and the diagnostic criteria.
尽管对边缘性诊断的可靠性和有效性缺乏系统研究，但它仍被广泛使用。最近开发的一种结构化访谈，以可重复的形式纳入了边缘性障碍的诊断标准，这是检验边缘性概念有效性的必要但不充分的方法步骤。据我们所知，这是首次在与原始研究截然不同的临床环境和人群中对冈德森的边缘性诊断访谈进行复制。将临床定义的边缘性患者与精神分裂症和非妄想性单相抑郁症患者的对照组进行比较。在诊断访谈的29条计分陈述中，边缘性患者与精神分裂症患者在19条陈述上有显著差异，与抑郁症患者在16条陈述上有显著差异，与两者在19条陈述上有显著差异。对边缘性患者与每个比较组进行逐步判别函数分析，为访谈和诊断标准的可靠性提供了有力支持。
