Cited by 171Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 73 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evidence-Based Treatments for Borderline Personality Disorder: Implementation, Integration, and Stepped Care

Choi-Kain, Lois W., Albert, Elizabeth B., Gunderson, John G.·2016·Harvard Review of Psychiatry

Abstract

Learning Objective: After participating in this activity, learners should be better able to: • Evaluate evidence-based therapies for borderline personality disorder Several manualized psychotherapies for treating borderline personality disorder (BPD) have been validated in randomized, controlled trials. Most of these approaches are highly specialized, offering different formulation of BPD and different mechanisms by which recovery is made possible. Mental health clinicians are challenged by the degree of specialization and clinical resources that these approaches require in their empirically validated adherent forms. While these effective treatments have renewed optimism for the treatment of BPD, clinicians may feel limited in their ability to offer any of them or may integrate an eclectic assortment of features from the different treatments. This article will evaluate four major evidence-based treatments for BPD—dialectical behavioral therapy, mentalization-based treatment, transference-focused psychotherapy, and General Psychiatric Management—and possible modes of implementation in adherent and integrative forms. Models of implementing these diverse treatment approaches will be evaluated, and the potential advantages of combining evidence-based treatments will be discussed, along with some cautionary notes. A proposal for providing stepwise care through assessment of clinical severity will be presented as a means of achieving system-wide changes and greater access to care.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/hrp.0000000000000113

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 74 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. 2013, Borderline personality disorder, Focus, 2, 129

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Choi-Kain, L. W., Albert, E. B., & Gunderson, J. G.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Choi-Kain, Lois W.
Venue
Harvard Review of Psychiatry
Published
2016-09
Volume
24
Issue
5
Pages
342-356
ISSN
  • 1067-3229 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-7309
OpenAlex
W2507334140
Cited by
171
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Harvard Review of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
borderline personality disorder, evidence-based psychotherapy, dialectical behavior therapy, mentalization-based treatment, transference-focused psychotherapy, treatment implementation, integrative psychotherapy, stepped care, clinical severity assessment, access to mental health care
MeSH terms
Borderline Personality Disorder, Humans, Psychotherapy, Evidence-Based Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review