124 Reframing the Approach to the Diagnosis and Treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder in Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Using the same DSM-5 criteria as in adults, BPD in adolescents is defined as a 1-year pattern of immature personality development with disturbances in at least 5 of the 9 domains listed in the DSM-5. BPD can now be reliably diagnosed as young as 13 using one of several standardized clinician, or self-rated diagnostic instruments. Unfortunately published US and Canadian positions regarding pharmacological treatment have been, With regard to evidence-based studies, pharmacological treatment is not recommended and, if ultimately required, should be limited to second-generation antipsychotics. Fortunately, the last decade s extensive advancements in brain-mapping have provided more clarity about the various brain dysfunctions underlying the symptoms/traits presenting in BPD, providing new opportunities to address these primarily Fronto-Limbic dysfunctions neuropharmacologically and potentially, significantly ameliorate. Thus, in turn, likely enhancing the effectiveness of the newer available therapies. Objectives: The current study explores the feasibility of more effectively managing BPD symptoms/traits with a unique medication protocol consisting of two medications; an anticonvulsant (oxcarbazepine) and a dopaminergic (amantadine HCl), without use of an antipsychotic medication. Methods: Subjects were 147 females, ages 13-16, with the diagnosis of BPD treated with the described medication protocol in a residential facility. Positive outcome was described as achievement and maintenance of greater than 50% improvement from baseline admission state of functioning for 1 year. They were discharged when stable and having achieved greater than 50% improvement from baseline. Outpatient prescribers were requested to be compliant with the treatment protocol. However, some were non-compliant, substituting antipsychotic medication instead. Care givers were surveyed at 6 months and 1 year to determine whether their child was maintaining greater than 50% improvement. Results: The percent maintaining greater than 50% improvement was calculated for those whose caregivers reported continuation of the medications as prescribed, versus those whose prescribers changed the medications to the Community Standard. Of those compliant with the medication protocol, 61 of 86 (71%) maintained >50% improvement. Of those moved to the Community Standard approach, 19 of 61 (31%) maintained >50% improvement. Using Chi Square analysis, there was a significant relationship between maintenance of improvement and medication protocol compliance. Chi Square, Fisher’s exact test = p<0.001. Conclusion: The results indicate that, for adolescents 1 year post-discharge from residential treatment for BPD, continuation of the above described medication protocol provides significantly higher rates of maintenance of achieved symptom improvement. Further controlled studies are needed. Funding: None.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".