A systematic scoping review of dissociation in borderline personality disorder and implications for research and clinical practice: Exploring the fog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is frequently complicated by the presence of dissociative symptoms. Pathological dissociation is linked with earlier and more severe trauma exposure, emotional dysregulation and worse treatment outcomes in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Dissociative Disorders, with implications for BPD. OBJECTIVE: A systematic scoping review was conducted to assess the extent of current literature regarding the impact of dissociation on BPD and to identify knowledge gaps. METHODS: Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus) were searched, and English peer-reviewed studies with adults with BPD were included, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) 2018 guidelines. RESULTS: Most of the 70 included studies were observational (98%) with first authors from Germany (59%). Overall, dissociation was associated with increased BPD symptom severity, self-harm and reduced psychotherapy treatment response; findings regarding suicide risk were mixed. Dissociation was associated with working memory and cognitive deficits, decreased pain perception, altered body ownership, no substance abuse or the abuse of sedative substances, increased fantasy proneness, personality fragmentation, fearful attachment, dream anxiety, perceived stress and altered stress responses, increased cumulative body mass index, decreased water consumption, several neurological correlates and changes in gene expression. CONCLUSION: BPD with significant dissociative symptoms may constitute a more severe and at-risk subgroup of BPD patients. However, there are significant research gaps and methodological issues in the area, including the possibility of unrecognized Dissociative Disorders in BPD study populations confounding results. Further studies are needed to better understand the impact of dissociation on BPD course and treatment, and to clarify the most appropriate assessment tools for clinical practice. In addition, interventional studies are needed to develop dissociation-specific BPD treatments to determine whether targeting dissociation in BPD can improve treatment outcomes.
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 | 0.038 | 0.147 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.029 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".