Is Child Maltreatment a Risk Factor for Borderline Personality Disorder? A Systematic Review of Prospective Longitudinal Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a clinical condition associated with numerous individual and collective negative consequences. According to several etiological theories and retrospective research, child maltreatment (CM) may be considered a central factor explaining BPD development. Objectives: In order to verify this hypothesis, a systematic review of prospective longitudinal studies was conducted. Methods: Following searches in five electronic databases, 19 articles that examined the relationship between CM (i.e., physical, sexual and emotional abuse; physical and emotional neglect) and BPD (i.e., diagnosis or severity score) were selected. Results: Overall, the results only partly confirm the hypothesis that CM is a risk factor for BPD. Evidence for a prospective relationship between CM and later BPD is stronger in studies using a symptom count compared to a categorical diagnosis. However, the small number of studies precludes assessing the differential impacts between CM types and BPD. Conclusion: Available prospective longitudinal studies do not unequivocally support the idea that CM is a robust risk factor for BPD. Future research needs are discussed.
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 | 0.008 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".