Borderline personality disorder symptoms in individuals with eating disorder: Association with severity, psychological distress, and psychosocial function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".