Cited by 54Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPersonality Traits and PsychologyMental Health Research Topics

A Comparison of Latent Class, Latent Trait, and Factor Mixture Models of DSM-IV Borderline Personality Disorder Criteria in a Community Setting: Implications for DSM-5

Open access
Conway, Christopher, Hammen, Constance, Brennan, Patricia·2012·Journal of Personality Disorders

Abstract

With the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) scheduled for publication in 2013, researchers continue to debate the optimal classification of borderline personality disorder (BPD). Much of the discussion has focused on the relative merits of dimensional versus categorical classification schemes for BPD. Advances in statistical technologies have made it possible to adjudicate between continuous and categorical models of BPD using quantitative methods, yet no prior studies have attempted such a comparison. The current study directly compares the fit of dimensional, categorical, and hybrid models of BPD in a large community sample (N = 700) of young adults at risk for psychopathology due to elevated rates of maternal depression. BPD symptoms were assessed using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders (SCID-II). Latent class, latent trait, and factor mixture models of SCID-II symptoms were estimated, and a latent trait model provided superior fit to the data, supporting a dimensional conceptualization of borderline pathology. The nosological implications of these results are discussed with respect to a "hybrid" model of BPD diagnosis currently under consideration for DSM-5.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1521/pedi.2012.26.5.793

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Conway, C., Hammen, C., & Brennan, P.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Emory University (US)
Venue
Journal of Personality Disorders
Published
2012-10
Volume
26
Issue
5
Pages
793-803
ISSN
0885-579X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2105410322
Cited by
54
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5
FWCI
5.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Personality Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH 52239, R01MH052239)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (T32HG002536)
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, DSM-5, latent trait models, latent class models, factor mixture models, SCID-II, maternal depression, young adults, disease classification, community sample
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Borderline Personality Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Cohort Studies, 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