MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Relationship Quality and Stability in Couples When One Partner Suffers From Borderline Personality Disorder

2009· article· en· W2014246861 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marital and Family Therapy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité LavalInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Québec
FundersU.S. National Library of Medicine
KeywordsBorderline personality disorderPsychologyPsychosocialPersonalityClinical psychologyPersonality disordersPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main goal of the present study was to examine and compare the psychosocial functioning of 35 couples including a woman diagnosed with borderline personality disorder (BPD) to that of a nonclinical control sample of 35 couples. The BPD status of women from the clinical group and the prevalence of personality disorder in their partner were ascertained through the SCID-II. Participants completed self-report measures of couple functioning. A majority of couples in which the woman suffered from BPD (68.7%) evidenced frequent episodes of breakups and reconciliations and, over an 18-month period, nearly 30% of these couples dissolved their relationship. Nearly half of the men involved in a romantic relationship with a woman suffering from BPD met criteria for one personality disorder or more. As compared with nonclinical couples, clinical couples showed lower marital satisfaction, higher attachment insecurity, more demand/withdraw communication problems, and higher levels of violence.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it