Dataset Information

Trait-based assessment of borderline personality disorder using the NEO Five-Factor Inventory: Phenotypic and genetic support.

ABSTRACT: [Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 28(1) of Psychological Assessment (see record 2015-54029-001). The FFI-BPD values for Sample 3 in Table 2 should read 1.42 (0.44), 0.83.] The aim of the current study was to examine the reliability and validity of a trait-based assessment of borderline personality disorder (BPD) using the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Correlations between the Five-Factor Inventory-BPD composite (FFI-BPD) and explicit measures of BPD were examined across 6 samples, including undergraduate, community, and clinical samples. The median correlation was .60, which was nearly identical to the correlation between measures of BPD and a BPD composite generated from the full Revised NEO Personality Inventory (i.e., NEO-BPD; r = .61). Correlations between FFI-BPD and relevant measures of psychiatric symptomatology and etiology (e.g., childhood abuse, drug use, depression, and personality disorders) were also examined and compared to those generated using explicit measures of BPD and NEO-BPD. As expected, the FFI-BPD composite correlated most strongly with measures associated with high levels of Neuroticism, such as depression, anxiety, and emotion dysregulation, and the pattern of correlations generated using the FFI-BPD was highly similar to those generated using explicit measures of BPD and NEO-BPD. Finally, genetic analyses estimated that FFI-BPD is 44% heritable, which is comparable to meta-analytic research examining genetics associated with BPD, and revealed that 71% of the genetic influences are shared between FFI-BPD and a self-report measure assessing BPD (Personality Assessment Inventory-Borderline subscale; Morey, 1991). Generally, these results support the use of FFI-BPD as a reasonable proxy for BPD, which has considerable implications, particularly for potential gene-finding efforts in large, epidemiological datasets that include the NEO FFI.

SUBMITTER: Few LR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4651858 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Trait-based assessment of borderline personality disorder using the NEO Five-Factor Inventory: Phenotypic and genetic support.

Few Lauren R LR Miller Joshua D JD Grant Julia D JD Maples Jessica J Trull Timothy J TJ Nelson Elliot C EC Oltmanns Thomas F TF Martin Nicholas G NG Lynskey Michael T MT Agrawal Arpana A

Psychological assessment 20150518 1

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 28(1) of Psychological Assessment (see record 2015-54029-001). The FFI-BPD values for Sample 3 in Table 2 should read 1.42 (0.44), 0.83.] The aim of the current study was to examine the reliability and validity of a trait-based assessment of borderline personality disorder (BPD) using the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Correlations between the Five-Factor Inventory-BPD composite (FFI-BPD) and explicit measures of BPD were examined a ...[more]

PMID: 25984635

Similar Datasets

Project description:The ICD-11 personality disorder model is the first fully dimensional assessment of personality pathology. It consists of a personality disorder (PD) dysfunction-severity dimension, which encompasses both self- and interpersonal dysfunction, and six optional qualifiers for five prominent personality traits-Negative Affectivity (NA), Detachment (DET), Dissociality (DSL), Disinhibition (DSN), and Anankastia (ANK)-plus a borderline pattern that is defined by the criteria of DSM-IV borderline PD. This article reports on the development of a new self-report measure to assess self- and interpersonal dysfunction and the five trait qualifiers. It is the first comprehensive measure of the ICD-11 PD model in that (a) it is the only one to include both PD dysfunction-severity as well as trait scales and because (b) it is based on the Clinical Description and Diagnostic Guidelines, which are more detailed than the "statistical" model description that is currently on the ICD-11 website. The authors wrote 992 items and then reduced the pool to 300 items by eliminating redundancy and selecting the consensus best few items for each subconstruct. Data were collected using an online sample of 383 Prolific workers. Using exploratory factor analysis, seven domain scales were developed, each of which contained two to four scales assessing components of the domain. These preliminary scales' psychometrics were excellent, as were the domains' and their components' convergent and discriminant validity, with a few generally minor exceptions. Structural analyses at the component level revealed a three-factor structure consisting of two moderately correlated Internalizing factors, one centered on Self Dysfunction with two NA components and a DSN component (Distractibility) and the other on Interpersonal Dysfunction with DET and ANK components; as well as an Externalizing factor with DSL and a DSN component (Reckless Impulsivity) that was uncorrelated with the other two factors. Two aspects of the results in particular are striking: (1) ANK was not the opposite end of a DSN dimension, but rather contributed to an Internalizing Interpersonal Dysfunction dimension and (2) DSN had both an Internalizing and an Externalizing component. Implications of the findings and study limitations are discussed.

Project description:BackgroundDrugs are widely used in borderline personality disorder (BPD) treatment, chosen because of properties known from other psychiatric disorders ("off-label use"), mostly targeting affective or impulsive symptom clusters.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of drug treatment in BPD patients.Search strategyWe searched bibliographic databases according to the Cochrane Developmental, Psychosocial and Learning Problems Group strategy up to September 2009, reference lists of articles, and contacted researchers in the field.Selection criteriaRandomised studies comparing drug versus placebo, or drug versus drug(s) in BPD patients. Outcomes included total BPD severity, distinct BPD symptom facets according to DSM-IV criteria, associated psychopathology not specific to BPD, attrition and adverse effects.Data collection and analysisTwo authors selected trials, assessed quality and extracted data, independently.Main resultsTwenty-eight trials involving a total of 1742 trial participants were included. First-generation antipsychotics (flupenthixol decanoate, haloperidol, thiothixene); second-generation antipsychotics (aripirazole, olanzapine, ziprasidone), mood stabilisers (carbamazepine, valproate semisodium, lamotrigine, topiramate), antidepressants (amitriptyline, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, phenelzine sulfate, mianserin), and dietary supplementation (omega-3 fatty acid) were tested. First-generation antipsychotics were subject to older trials, whereas recent studies focussed on second-generation antipsychotics and mood stabilisers. Data were sparse for individual comparisons, indicating marginal effects for first-generation antipsychotics and antidepressants.The findings were suggestive in supporting the use of second-generation antipsychotics, mood stabilisers, and omega-3 fatty acids, but require replication, since most effect estimates were based on single studies. The long-term use of these drugs has not been assessed.Adverse event data were scarce, except for olanzapine. There was a possible increase in self-harming behaviour, significant weight gain, sedation and changes in haemogram parameters with olanzapine. A significant decrease in body weight was observed with topiramate treatment. All drugs were well tolerated in terms of attrition.Direct drug comparisons comprised two first-generation antipsychotics (loxapine versus chlorpromazine), first-generation antipsychotic against antidepressant (haloperidol versus amitriptyline; haloperidol versus phenelzine sulfate), and second-generation antipsychotic against antidepressant (olanzapine versus fluoxetine). Data indicated better outcomes for phenelzine sulfate but no significant differences in the other comparisons, except olanzapine which showed more weight gain and sedation than fluoxetine. The only trial testing single versus combined drug treatment (olanzapine versus olanzapine plus fluoxetine; fluoxetine versus fluoxetine plus olanzapine) yielded no significant differences in outcomes.Authors' conclusionsThe available evidence indicates some beneficial effects with second-generation antipsychotics, mood stabilisers, and dietary supplementation by omega-3 fatty acids. However, these are mostly based on single study effect estimates. Antidepressants are not widely supported for BPD treatment, but may be helpful in the presence of comorbid conditions. Total BPD severity was not significantly influenced by any drug. No promising results are available for the core BPD symptoms of chronic feelings of emptiness, identity disturbance and abandonment. Conclusions have to be drawn carefully in the light of several limitations of the RCT evidence that constrain applicability to everyday clinical settings (among others, patients' characteristics and duration of interventions and observation periods).

Dataset Information

Trait-based assessment of borderline personality disorder using the NEO Five-Factor Inventory: Phenotypic and genetic support.

Publications

Trait-based assessment of borderline personality disorder using the NEO Five-Factor Inventory: Phenotypic and genetic support.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets