MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293769599 · doi:10.1002/pmh.1565

Borderline personality disorder symptoms in individuals with eating disorder: Association with severity, psychological distress, and psychosocial function

2022· article· en· W4293769599 on OpenAlexaff
Prudence Vivarini, Zoë Jenkins, David Castle, Karen Gwee

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Mental Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBorderline personality disorderPsychosocialDistressClinical psychologyPsychologyBody mass indexEating disordersPsychiatryComorbidityMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We aimed to determine the prevalence of borderline personality disorder (BPD) symptoms in a sample of eating disorder (ED) outpatients and assess how BPD symptoms correlate with severity, distress, and function. A total of 119 individuals were assessed and divided into high BPD symptoms (H-BPD) and low BPD symptoms (L-BPD) using a cut-off score of seven on the McLean Screening for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI-BPD). Groups were compared on ED diagnosis, age at ED onset, age at assessment, illness duration, body mass index (BMI), ED symptomatology, psychological distress, and psychosocial function. Correlation analyses were performed to assess the relationship between BPD symptoms and these variables. The 45.4% of the participants scored ≥7 on the MSI-BPD, indicating a diagnosis of BPD. There were no differences between the H-BPD (N = 54) and L-BPD (N = 65) groups on age at onset, age at assessment, duration of illness, BMI, or proportion of ED diagnosis. The H-BPD group reported significantly higher ED symptomatology, psychological distress, and poorer psychosocial functioning. MSI-BPD scores were positively associated with these variables. This study suggests a high prevalence of BPD symptoms within outpatients seeking ED treatment, and use of a brief screening instrument for BPD in this group may contribute to a greater understanding of the patient.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality and Mental HealthSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207