The Short Version of the Borderline Symptom List (BSL-23): Development and Initial Data on Psychometric Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The full version of the Borderline Symptom List (BSL; for clarification now labeled BSL-95) is a self-rating instrument for specific assessment of borderline-typical symptomatology. The BSL-95 items are based on criteria of the DSM-IV, the revised version of the Diagnostic Interview for Borderline Personality Disorder, and the opinions of both clinical experts and borderline patients. The BSL-95 includes 95 items. In order to reduce patient burden and assessment time, a short version with 23 items (BSL-23) was developed. METHODS: The development of the BSL-23 was based on a sample of 379 borderline patients, considering the items from the BSL-95 that had the highest levels of sensitivity to change and the highest ability to discriminate borderline patients from other patient groups. In a second step, the psychometric properties of the BSL-23 were investigated and compared with the psychometric properties of the BSL-95 in 5 different samples, including a total of 659 borderline patients. RESULTS: In all of the samples, a high correlation of the sum score was found between the BSL-23 and the BSL-95 (range: 0.958-0.963). The internal consistency was high for both versions (BSL-23/Cronbach's alpha: 0.935-0.969; BSL-95/Cronbach's alpha: 0.977-0.978). Both BSL-23 and BSL-95 clearly discriminated borderline personality disorder patients from patients with an axis I diagnosis (mean effect sizes were 1.13 and 0.96 for the BSL-23 and BSL-95, respectively). In addition, comparisons before and after 3 months of dialectical behavior therapy revealed a numerically larger effect size for the BSL-23 (d = 0.47) compared to the BSL-95 (d = 0.38). CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the BSL-23 is an efficient and convenient self-rating instrument that displays good psychometric properties comparable to those of the BSL-95. The BSL-23 also demonstrated sensitivity to the effects of therapy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".