The Relationship Between Personality Disorders and Axis I Psychopathology: Deconstructing Comorbidity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this review is (a) to study and systematically review the recent literature examining the co-occurrence and relationships between Axis I psychiatric disorders and Axis II personality disorders, specifically the six originally proposed for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-5, and (b) to consider the clinical utility of the current Axis I and Axis II approach in the DSM-IV-TR and apply findings to state a position on the issue of collapsing together Axis I and Axis II. Community surveys or prospective cohort studies were reviewed as a priority. Our review indicates that the associations between clinical disorders and personality disorders clearly varied within each disorder and across the six personality disorders. Our understanding has advanced, particularly related to the clinical utility of comorbidity, and there may be sufficient evidence to support moving borderline personality disorder to Axis I. However, it seems premature to conclude that comorbidity is best conceptualized by having all disorders in a single category or by deleting disorders so that comorbidity is reduced. Our review suggests some priorities for future research into comorbidity, such as including personality disorders in future multivariate comorbidity models.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".