Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the extent to which personality disorder (PD) diagnoses drawn in active bulimics explained pretreatment and posttreatment comorbid features, once possible secondary effects of bulimia nervosa (BN) on the mental status were controlled. We used structured interviews to assign axis II diagnoses to 73 DSM-III-R bulimics, and then examined whether or not classification into borderline PD (BPD), other PD (OPD), or no PD (NPD) groups (a) predicted pretreatment and posttreatment differences in comorbid symptoms, and (b) explained the severity of comorbid symptoms independent of effects attributable to BN sequelae. Groups never differed on eating-symptom measures, with all showing satisfactory average improvements over 3 months. However, on pretreatment and posttreatment comorbid symptoms, BPD subjects displayed more depression, reliance on maladaptive defenses, and other pathological features than did other groups. More importantly, after controlling for the effects of possible sequelae of BN on comorbid symptoms at each point in time, a borderline/nonborderline distinction always explained significant residual proportions of variance in comorbid symptoms. These findings suggest that despite tendencies for BN to exacerbate concurrent symptoms, axis II diagnoses remain meaningful as indicators of comorbid features.
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".