4.6 Article

Confirmatory factor analysis of DSM-IV criteria for borderline personality disorder: Findings from the collaborative longitudinal personality disorders study

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
卷 159, 期 2, 页码 284-290

出版社

AMER PSYCHIATRIC PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.159.2.284

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [MH-01654, MH-50839, MH-50838, MH-50840, MH-50850, MH-50837] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: This study tested the factor structure of the DSM-IV criteria for borderline personality disorder by using confirmatory methods for the analysis of covariance structures in a large group from a multisite study. Method: A total of 668 primarily treatment seeking subjects were reliably assessed for personality disorders by using the Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders. Associations among criteria for borderline personality disorder were examined. A confirmatory factor analysis was performed to test diagnosis as a unitary construct and to test an earlier-reported three-factor model comprising disturbed relatedness, behavioral dysregulation, and affective dysregulation. The three-factor model was subsequently tested by using a subset (N=498) of the study group that was reassessed 2 years later by independent evaluators who were blind to original diagnoses. Results: Internal consistency of the borderline personality disorder diagnosis was adequate for both baseline and follow-up assessments. A confirmatory factor analysis model testing the borderline personality disorder diagnosis as a unitary construct provided good fit, and the three-factor model offered a significantly better fit for the baseline assessment, The three-factor model was replicated with the 2-year follow-up data. Conclusions: The diagnostic criteria for borderline personality disorder appear to reflect a statistically coherent construct. Three homogeneous components were supported empirically, lending conceptual clarity to different classes of the criteria for borderline personality disorder.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据