Cited by 111Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPersonality Traits and PsychologyMental Health Research Topics

ICD-11 and DSM-5 personality trait domains capture categorical personality disorders: Finding a common ground

Bach, Bo, Sellbom, Martin, Skjernov, Mathias, Simonsen, Erik·2018·Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective The five personality disorder trait domains in the proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition are comparable in terms of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism/Dissociality and Disinhibition. However, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model includes a separate domain of Anankastia, whereas the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition model includes an additional domain of Psychoticism. This study examined associations of International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition trait domains, simultaneously, with categorical personality disorders. Method Psychiatric outpatients ( N = 226) were administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders Interview and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition trait domain scores were obtained using pertinent scoring algorithms for the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Associations between categorical personality disorders and trait domains were examined using correlation and multiple regression analyses. Results Both the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition domain…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0004867417727867

Cites

Statistics

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

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?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 44 · Cited by 111

Authors
Bach, B., Sellbom, M., Skjernov, M., & Simonsen, E.
Affiliations
  • Psychiatry Region Zealand (DK)
  • University of Otago (NZ)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
Corresponding author
Bach, Bo
Venue
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2017-08-23
Volume
52
Issue
5
Pages
425-434
ISSN
  • 0004-8674 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1614
OpenAlex
W2747656349
Cited by
111
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7
FWCI
10.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
ICD-11, DSM-5, personality disorders, negative affectivity, detachment, disinhibition, anankastia, psychoticism, obsessive-compulsive personality disorder, schizotypal personality disorder, psychiatric classification
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Compulsive Personality Disorder, Female, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Middle Aged, Personality Disorders, Schizotypal Personality Disorder, Sensitivity and Specificity, International Classification of Diseases, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Young Adult

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