Outcomes in women diagnosed with borderline personality disorder in adolescence.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the outcomes of patients diagnosed with borderline personality disorder (BPD) prior to age 18. METHOD: In a group of 47 adolescent girls assessed over a 10 year period, 31 had a past diagnosis of BPD while 16 had not met criteria. Subjects were assessed with the SCID-I, the Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines (DIB), the SCL-90-R, the Social Adjustment Scale (SAS-SR), the Affective Lability Scale (ALS), the Barratt Impulsivity Scale (BIS), the Continuous Performance Test (CPT), the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), and the Attention Network Task (ANT). RESULTS: 4.3 years after initial presentation (mean age=19.6), only 11 index patients still met criteria for BPD and no new cases developed. Those who did not remit were significantly more likely to have a current episode of major depressive disorder, lifetime substance use disorder, and self-reported childhood sexual abuse. Those who still met BPD criteria also scored higher on the ALS and the total severity scale as well as several subscales of the SCL-90, but not on other measures. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the validity of an adolescent diagnosis of BPD and show that the majority of cases that develop in early adolescence can be expected to remit within 4 years.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".