4.7 Article

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Borderline Personality Disorder symptoms based on two different interviews: The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Disorder and the Revised Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines

Journal

PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH
Volume 190, Issue 2-3, Pages 304-308

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2011.05.014

Keywords

Borderline personality disorder; Confirmatory factor analysis; Criteria

Categories

Funding

  1. Pla Director de Salut Mental i Addiccions (Generalitat de Catalunya Health Department)
  2. Obra Social - Fundacio la Caixa

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The diagnostic criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) are heterogeneous, and include an admixture of personality traits, behaviours, and symptoms. The BPD DSM factor structure has been extensively studied, even though results are not consistent. In this study we performed a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to compare the five-factor model reported by Oldham, a three-factor model, and a unidimensional model of BPD diagnosis criteria. This study validates the findings of previous studies by performing a CFA with the DSM-IV BPD criteria and information derived from the DIB-R. A sample of 338 patients referred to our outpatient BPD program participated in the study. Results of the CFA support both the hypothesized unidimensional and the three-factor models, whereas the five-factor model was not confirmed. However, the three-factor model fits better than the unidimensional model. Thus, although the DSM-IV BPD criteria conceptualize BPD as a unidimensional structure, our results give support to the idea that the three-factor model could offer a better approach to further improve the current treatment of BPD, as well as lead to a better understanding of its ethiopathogenesis and comorbidity analysis. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available