What is it about?

The Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD), introduced in the DSM-5 (APA, 2013), was proposed to overcome the several limitations of the traditional symptom-based model (Waugh et al., 2017; Zimmerman et al., 2019). In the AMPD, PD are defined by two dimensional criteria (the level of personality functioning and maladaptive personality traits), but as a hybrid model, it also allows for categorical assessment of PD to facilitate continuity with clinical practice. The present study aimed to provide normative data for two widely used instruments assessing Criterion A (Level of Personality Functioning Scale – Self-Report; Morey, 2017) and B (Personality Inventory for DSM-5; Krueger et al., 2012) in a large populational French-Canadian sample to support clinical assessment of the AMPD. This study also reports prevalence estimates for the seven categorical personality disorders of the AMPD. In the populational sample, results showed that prevalence rates varied from 0.2% (antisocial PD) to 3.0% (trait-specified PD), with an overall prevalence of 5.9% to 6.1% for any PD. Prevalence was higher in men than in women in the populational sample, but the contrary was observed in the at-risk sample. Prevalence was higher in younger adults than in middle-aged and older adults.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

This is the first study to report on the prevalence of categorical personality disorders according to the alternative model of personality disorders in la large populational sample. It also provides clinicians and researchers with normative data to interpret their clients or participants test results to two widely used assessment instruments for the alternative model of personality disorders.

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Prevalence of the alternative model of personality disorders diagnoses in populational and at-risk samples, gender and age groups comparisons, and normative data for the LPFS-SR and PID-5., Personality Disorders Theory Research and Treatment, July 2023, American Psychological Association (APA), DOI: 10.1037/per0000632.
You can read the full text:



The following have contributed to this page