Mental state decoding impairment in major depression and borderline personality disorder: Meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
Background: Patients with major depression and borderline personality disorder are characterised by a distorted perception of other people's intentions. Deficits in mental state decoding are thought to be the underlying cause of this clinical feature. Aims: To examine, using meta-analysis, whether mental state decoding abilities in patients with major depression and borderline personality disorder differ from those of healthy controls. Method: A systematic review of 13 cross-sectional studies comparing Reading in the Mind of the Eyes Test (RMET) accuracy performance of patients with major depression or borderline personality disorder and healthy age-matched controls (n = 976). Valence scores, where reported, were also assessed. Results: Large significant deficits were seen for global RMET performance in patients with major depression (d =–0.751). The positive RMET valence scores of patients with depression were significantly worse; patients with borderline personality disorder had worse neutral scores. Both groups were worse than controls. Moderator analysis revealed that individuals with comorbid borderline personality disorder and major depression did better than those with borderline personality disorder alone on accuracy. Those with comorbid borderline personality disorder and any cluster B or C personality disorder did worse than borderline personality disorder alone. Individuals with both borderline personality disorder and major depression performed better then those with borderline personality disorder without major depression for positive valence. Conclusions: These findings highlight the relevance of RMET performance in patients with borderline personality disorder and major depression, and the importance of considering comorbidity in future analysis.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
MDD was associated with other psychiatric disorders, especially generalized anxiety disorder and borderline personality disorder.
“Major depressive disorder was associated with other psychiatric disorders, especially generalized anxiety disorder and borderline personality disorder, associations found in previous studies.5,[46][47][48][49]”
From Epidemiology of Adult <i>DSM-5</i> Major Depressive Disorder and Its Specifiers in the United States (2018) · cites this paper as [47]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 44 · Cited by 89
- Authors
- Richman, M. J., & Unoka, Z.
- Affiliations
- Semmelweis University (HU)
- Corresponding author
- Unoka, Zsolt
- Venue
- British Journal of Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Royal College of Psychiatrists
- Published
- 2015-12
- Volume
- 207
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 483-489
- ISSN
- 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
- 1472-1465
- OpenAlex
- W2187441189
- Cited by
- 89
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 1.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Semmelweis University Repository (Semmelweis University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- European Commission
- European Social Fund
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Keywords
- mental state decoding, major depressive disorder, borderline personality disorder, Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test, theory of mind, social cognition, comorbidities, positive valence
- MeSH terms
- Borderline Personality Disorder, Cognition, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Humans, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Comorbidity, Publication Bias
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