Cited by 450Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyChild Abuse and TraumaPersonality Traits and Psychology

Childhood adversity and borderline personality disorder: a meta‐analysis

Open access
Porter, C., Palmier‐Claus, J., Branitsky, A., Mansell, W., Warwick, H., Varese, F.·2020·Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this meta‐analysis was to better understand the magnitude and consistency of the association between childhood adversity and borderline personality disorder (BPD) across case–control, epidemiological and prospective cohort studies. Method: Following the review protocol (reference: CRD42017075179), search terms pertaining to adversity and BPD were entered into three search engines. Random‐effects meta‐analysis synthesised the size and consistency of the effects. Results: A total of 97 studies compared BPD to non‐clinical ( k = 40) and clinical ( k = 70) controls. Meta‐analysis of case–control studies indicated that individuals with BPD are 13.91 (95% CI 11.11–17.43) times more likely to report childhood adversity than non‐clinical controls. This effect was smaller when considering retrospective cohort (OR: 2.59; 95% CI 0.93–7.30) and epidemiological (OR: 2.56, 95% CI 1.24–5.30) studies. Findings were significant across adversity subtypes with emotional abuse (OR: 38.11, 95% CI: 25.99–55.88) and neglect (OR: 17.73, 95% CI = 13.01–24.17) demonstrating the largest effects. Individuals with BPD were 3.15 (95% CI 2.62–3.79) times more likely to report childhood adversity than other psychiatric groups. Conclusions: This meta‐analysis corroborates theoretical proposals that exposure to adverse life experiences is associated with BPD. It highlights the importance of considering childhood adversity when treating people diagnosed with BPD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/acps.13118

Cites

143 of 143 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Porter, C., Palmier‐Claus, J., Branitsky, A., Mansell, W., Warwick, H., & Varese, F.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Palmier‐Claus, J.
Venue
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-11-18
Volume
141
Issue
1
Pages
6-20
ISSN
  • 0001-690X (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0447
OpenAlex
W2981184913
Cited by
450
References
141
Citations by year
2026: 63 · 2025: 90 · 2024: 77 · 2023: 75 · 2022: 80 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
5.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Niilo Helanderin Säätiö
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
borderline personality disorder, childhood adversity, adverse childhood experiences, emotional abuse, child neglect, psychiatric comorbidity
MeSH terms
Adverse Childhood Experiences, Emotional Abuse, Mental Disorders, Borderline Personality Disorder, Child, Child Abuse, Child Abuse, Sexual, Humans

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.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-07.

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