CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 413Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPersonality Traits and PsychologyMental Health Research Topics

Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder (Zan-BPD): a continuous measure of DSM-IV borderline psychopathology

Zanarini, Mary C.·2003·Journal of Personality Disorders
DOI 10.1521/pedi.17.3.233.22147
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of the Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder (ZAN-BPD), the first clinician-administered scale for the assessment of change in DSM-IV borderline psychopathology. The questions for the measure were adapted from the BPD module of the Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (DIPD-IV) to reflect a 1-week time frame and each of the nine criteria for BPD is rated on a five-point anchored rating scale of 0 to 4, yielding a total score of 0 to 36. Two diagnostic interviews that assess the presence of BPD were administered to 200 nonpsychotic patients: the BPD module of the DIPD-IV and the Revised Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines (DIB-R). The ZAN-BPD was also administered, blind to diagnostic information. In addition, each patient filled out a self-report measure of general psychopathology that is often used in borderline treatment studies, the Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90). The convergent validity of the ZAN-BPD and relevant scales of the SCL-90 and the DIB-R was assessed and found to be highly significant. The discriminant validity of the various scores of the ZAN-BPD was also found to be highly significant, easily discriminating the 139 patients who met the DSM-IV criteria for BPD from the 61 patients who did not. In addition, internal consistency of the ZAN-BPD was found to be high (Cronbach's alpha=0.85). The interrater reliability of the ZAN-BPD was assessed using 32 conjoint interviews, while same day test-retest reliability was assessed in a separate sample of 40 patients. All reliability raters were blind to all previously collected information concerning each subject. All intraclass correlations were in the good to excellent range. Finally, the sensitivity of the ZAN-BPD to change was assessed using a third sample of 41 patients who were reinterviewed by a blind rater 7 to 10 days after the ZAN-BPD was first administered. The SCL-90 was also readministered at this time. The correlations between difference scores of the ZAN-BPD and difference scores of the SCL-90 were found to be significant, indicating that the ZAN-BPD measures change in a clinically meaningful manner. Taken together, the results of this study suggest that the ZAN-BPD is a promising clinician-administered scale for the assessment of change in borderline psychopathology over time.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1521/pedi.17.3.233.22147

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Assessment instruments have been developed lately to reflect BPD core pathology as described precisely by the DSM-IV criteria, such as the BPDSI, CGI-BPD, and ZAN-BPD scales.

    “Assessment instruments have been developed lately to reflect BPD core pathology as described precisely by the DSM-IV criteria (for example, the BPDSI scale by Arntz 2003, the CGI-BPD scale by Perez 2007, or the ZAN-BPD scale by Zanarini 2003a).”

    From Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder. (2012) · cites this paper as Zanarini 2003a

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zanarini, M. C.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Zanarini, Mary C.
ORCID
Zanarini, Mary C.
Venue
Journal of Personality Disorders
Publisher
Guilford Publications
Published
2003-06
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
233-242
ISSN
0885-579X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1521/pedi.17.3.233.22147
OpenAlex
W2165822885
Cited by
413
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 14
FWCI
4.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
borderline personality disorder, psychometric properties, convergent validity, discriminant validity, inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, sensitivity to change, SCL-90, treatment outcomes
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Borderline Personality Disorder, Female, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychopathology, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

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