International Assessment of DSM-5 and ICD-11 Personality Disorder Traits: Toward a Common Nosology in DSM-5.1

Bach, Bo; Kerber, André; Aluja, Antón; Bastiaens, Tim; Keeley, Jared W.; Claes, Laurence; Fossati, Andrea; Gutiérrez, Fernando; Oliveira, Sérgio Eduardo Silva de; Pires, Rute; Riegel, Karel D.; Rolland, Jean Pierre; Roskam, Isabelle; Sellbom, Martin; Somma, Antonella; Spanemberg, Lucas; Strus, Włodzimierz; Thimm, Jens C.; Wright, Aidan G.C.; Zimmermann, Johannes

doi:10.1159/000507589

Cited by 92 publications

(121 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

103

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The DSM-5 AMPD domains of negative affectivity (facets of perseveration, hostility) and low disinhibition (rigid perfectionism, distractibility) were found to be predictors of the ICD-11 anankastia domain (17,21,36,37,40), consistent with the conceptual similarity of the domains of negative affectivity and disinhibition in these nosologies (62). These findings were also in line with views that ICD-11 anankastia, or obsessive-compulsive traits in DSM-5, are the inverse trait of disinhibition, so leading to the omission of such traits in the final DSM-5 AMPD model (20).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Obsessive-Compulsive (Anankastic) Personality Disorder in the ICD-11: A Scoping Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: With the shift from a categorical to a dimensional model, ICD-11 has made substantial changes to the diagnosis of personality disorders (PDs), including obsessive-compulsive (anankastic) personality disorder (OCPD). The ICD-11 PD model proposes a single diagnosis of PD with specifications regarding severity and domains. However, a systematic overview of ICD-11 anankastia is lacking. In this review we address the reformulation of the OCPD diagnosis in the ICD-11, and draw comparisons with the DSM-5, with a particular focus on diagnostic validity and clinical utility. We hypothesized that the ICD-11 PD model provides a diagnostically valid and clinically useful approach to OCPD, with specific emphasis on the anankastia domain as the primary trait qualifier.Methods: Literature published from 2010 to 2020 was systematically searched using the PubMed/MEDLINE, PsychInfo, Cochrane, and Web of Sciences search engines, in order to find all articles that addressed ICD-11 anankastia. Relevant articles were collated, and themes of these articles subsequently extracted.Results: Out of the 264 publications identified, 19 articles were included in this review. Four themes were identified, namely (a) overlap of DSM-5 OCPD with the ICD-11 PD model, (b) the factorial structure of the ICD-11 PD model with respect to the anankastia domain, (c) the clinical utility of the ICD-11 PD model, and (d) comparison of the ICD-11 PD model of anankastia with the DSM-5 alternative model for OCPD.Conclusions: The ICD-11 anankastia domain overlaps with DSM-5 OCPD traits, and the factor analyses of the ICD-11 PD model further support the diagnostic validity of this domain. There is some support for the clinical utility of the ICD-11 PD model of anankastia but further studies are needed, including of its relationship to obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Obsessive-Compulsive (Anankastic) Personality Disorder in the ICD-11: A Scoping Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the current study did not focus on the primary target population that is assumed to show particularly severe impairments in mentalizing capacity, that is, individuals with borderline personality pathology . Moreover, new and improved versions of the short form of the PID-5 are available (e.g., Bach et al, 2020) but were not used in Sample 2.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical Evaluation of the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire

Müller¹,

Wendt²,

Spitzer³

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Reflective Functioning Questionnaire-8 (RFQ-8) is a short self-report measure of reflective functioning (i.e., the ability to understand mental states of both the self and others) that is presumed to capture individual differences in hypo- and hypermentalizing. Despite its broad acceptance by the field and its regular use in primary investigations of the construct, we argue that the validity of the measure is still not well established. The current research elaborates on why the proposed scoring procedure may be methodologically problematic, the item content might not sufficiently cover the full breadth of the mentalizing construct, and it is unclear whether the measure captures mentalizing processes in particular or rather general psychological impairment. In a clinical sample (N = 861) and a sample of young adults (N = 566), we explore these critical considerations and demonstrate that the RFQ-8 may assess a single latent dimension related to hypomentalizing, but provides little unique variance above and beyond broad dimensions of personality pathology and is unlikely to capture maladaptive forms of hypermentalizing. The findings cast doubt on the validity of the RFQ-8 as a measure of reflective functioning. Future research should increase validation efforts concerning the RFQ-8 or develop new measures of reflective functioning.

show abstract

“…Recently, a measure combining both conceptualizations was developed starting from the item pool of the PID-5 and using ant colony optimization algorithms (12). The resulting Personality Inventory for DSM-5, Brief Form Plus (PID5BF+) was subsequently adapted to also capture trait facets of the ICD-11 Anankastia domain, leading to the Modified Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Brief Form Plus [PID5BF+ M; (6)].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Case Report: Pathological Personality Traits Through the Lens of the ICD-11 Trait Qualifiers and the DSM-5 Section III Trait Model: Two Patients Illustrating the Clinical Utility of a Combined View

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report on two individuals presenting for treatment as part of everyday clinical practice, comparing their pathological personality traits through the lens of the ICD-11 trait qualifiers and the DSM-5 Section III personality trait model. We compare higher order pathological personality domains and lower order pathological personality trait facets of patient M (diagnosed with borderline personality traits according to DSM-5 Section II), and patient L (diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive personality traits according to DSM-5 Section II) with normative data and with each other. Findings highlight the clinical utility of a ICD-11/DSM-5 combined view, including: (1) the Disinhibition/Anankastia personality domain distinction as advocated in the ICD-11 model, (2) the Psychoticism personality domain as conceptualized in the DSM-5 Section III personality trait model, as well as (3) the use of lower order personality trait facets within each higher order personality domain.

show abstract

International Assessment of DSM-5 and ICD-11 Personality Disorder Traits: Toward a Common Nosology in DSM-5.1

Cited by 92 publications

References 58 publications

Obsessive-Compulsive (Anankastic) Personality Disorder in the ICD-11: A Scoping Review

Obsessive-Compulsive (Anankastic) Personality Disorder in the ICD-11: A Scoping Review

A Critical Evaluation of the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire

Case Report: Pathological Personality Traits Through the Lens of the ICD-11 Trait Qualifiers and the DSM-5 Section III Trait Model: Two Patients Illustrating the Clinical Utility of a Combined View

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About