首页> 外文期刊>Vojnosanitetski Pregled >Analysis of personality disorder profiles obtained by five-factor personality model
【24h】

Analysis of personality disorder profiles obtained by five-factor personality model

机译:五因素人格模型获得的人格障碍谱分析

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background/Aim. In spite of the growing body of evidence in the field of personality disorders, these disorders still retain the lowest diagnostic reliability of any major category of mental disorders. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences of personality profiles in patients diagnosed with personality disorder in comparison with the group of healthy control subjects, as well as to establish to what extent the five-factor personality model domains determine the specific clusters of personality disorders. Methods. The study group comprised 97 patients diagnosed as personality disorders (according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ? DSM-IV criteria), aged between 18 and 65 years [mean = 35.78 years, standard deviation (SD) = 13.72 years], 67% were female. Control group included 58 healthy subjects (student population) aged between 20 to 35 years (mean = 22.48 years, SD = 2.56 years), 56% were female. The assessment was carried out by the new version of the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PIR), form S, and the Structured Clinical Interview (SCID II) for DSM-IV disorders. Results. The three clusters were found by the use of regression analysis: cluster A ? eccentrics (low scores in agreeableness), cluster B ? dramatics (high score in extroversion, low score in agreeableness, and cluster C ? anxious (low score in extroversion). The findings showed that the high level of neuroticism was a non-specific predictor of all three clusters, while dimension openness to experience had no predictive power for any of the three clusters. Conclusion. Our findings support the meta-analysis which suggests consistently high level of neuroticism and low level of agreeableness in most personality disorders. The study showed that it is possible to conceptualize personality disorders by using five-factor personality model of normal personality. Integrating the psychiatric classification with the dimensional model of general personality structure could enable the uncovering of essential parameters for setting the diagnosis.
机译:背景/目标。尽管人格障碍领域的证据越来越多,但这些疾病仍然保留了任何主要类别的精神障碍的最低诊断可靠性。本研究的目的是探讨与健康对照组群诊断患有个性障碍的患者人格型材的差异,以及建立五因素人格模型域确定特定人格集群的程度障碍。方法。该研究组包含97名诊断为人格障碍的患者(根据精神障碍的诊断和统计手册?DSM-IV标准),年龄在18至65岁之间[平均值= 35.78岁,标准差(SD)= 13.72岁], 67%是女性。对照组包括在20至35岁之间的58名健康受试者(学生人口)(平均= 22.48岁,SD = 2.56岁),56%是女性。评估由新版本的新版Neo人格库存修订(Neo-PIR),表格S和结构化的临床访谈(SCID II)进行DSM-IV障碍。结果。使用回归分析发现三个集群:群集A?佛城(协议中的低分),群集B?戏剧性(高分倾向,促进的高分,令人担忧的群体C?焦虑(促进的低分)。结果表明,高水平的神经质是所有三个集群的非特异性预测因素,而体验的尺寸开放性任何三种集群中的任何一个都没有预测力。结论。我们的研究结果支持荟萃分析,这表明大多数人格障碍的始终如一的神经骚扰和低水平的令人愉快的协议。该研究表明,可以使用五个概念概念性格障碍 - 正常人格的等待性人格模型。与通用人格结构的尺寸模型集成精神病学分类,可以揭示用于设置诊断的基本参数。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号