Examining the predictive association of irritability with borderline personality disorder in a clinical sample of female adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a disorder associated with emotion dysregulation and is common in clinical samples of adolescents. The identification and delineation of BPD from other disorders is important, yet methods for effectively screening for BPD are lacking. Here, we examine whether irritability can be used as a screening item for BPD in adolescents at risk for the disorder. METHODS: We assessed Diagnostic Interview for Borderline-Revised and Development of Well-Being Assessment scores in a clinical sample of female adolescents ages 12-17 (n = 78) to identify BPD and group cases into 'irritable' and 'non-irritable' mood types, respectively. We then examined the prevalence of irritability and its predictive association with BPD. RESULTS: (1) = 17.740, p < 0.001). Irritability was endorsed in all (n = 20) BPD cases (sensitivity: 100%), while in non-BPD cases (n = 58), irritability was endorsed in 27 (specificity: 53%; positive predictive value: 0.33; and negative predictive value: 1.0). CONCLUSION: Irritability is a highly sensitive screening item for BPD in adolescents. The absence of irritability in an adolescent may be an important clinical tool to rule out BPD. © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".