Cargando…

Psychometric evaluation of the Estonian version of the Semi-structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1)

BACKGROUND: The DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders introduced a dimensional perspective on personality disorders. The model assesses functioning in four domains: Identity, Self-Direction, Empathy, and Intimacy. This study evaluates the psychometric properties of the Semi-Structured In...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oitsalu, Maarja-Liisa, Kreegipuu, Maie, Hutsebaut, Joost
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9714151/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36451191
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40479-022-00197-7
_version_ 1784842161386160128
author Oitsalu, Maarja-Liisa
Kreegipuu, Maie
Hutsebaut, Joost
author_facet Oitsalu, Maarja-Liisa
Kreegipuu, Maie
Hutsebaut, Joost
author_sort Oitsalu, Maarja-Liisa
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders introduced a dimensional perspective on personality disorders. The model assesses functioning in four domains: Identity, Self-Direction, Empathy, and Intimacy. This study evaluates the psychometric properties of the Semi-Structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1) in Estonian. METHOD: The sample consists of 131 participants: 58 from the general population and 73 from a mixed clinical sample that is further divided into a mood and anxiety disorder sample and personality disorder sample. All participants completed the STiP-5.1 interview and the Level of Personality Functioning Scale–Brief Form (LPFS-BF 2.0). RESULTS: The Estonian STiP-5.1 interview has good internal consistency (McDonald's ω between .94–.98) and high convergent validity (correlations with LPFS-BF 2.0 above .7). Interview scores successfully differentiated the general population from the mixed clinical sample (Cohen’s d = 2.68), as well as patients with personality disorder from those without (Cohen’s d = 1.76). The LPFS-BF 2.0 total score differentiates the general population sample from the mixed clinical sample (Cohen’s d = 1.99) but not the personality disorder sample from other clinical sample participants. CONCLUSIONS: The properties of the Estonian STiP-5.1 replicate those of other languages, and empirically support a unified personality functioning dimension that can be meaningfully thought of as reflecting impairments in self and interpersonal functioning. Findings of this study will be discussed in the light of the ongoing debate on the dimensionality of personality pathology and the use of self-report versus interview measures for assessing personality pathology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9714151
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97141512022-12-02 Psychometric evaluation of the Estonian version of the Semi-structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1) Oitsalu, Maarja-Liisa Kreegipuu, Maie Hutsebaut, Joost Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul Research BACKGROUND: The DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders introduced a dimensional perspective on personality disorders. The model assesses functioning in four domains: Identity, Self-Direction, Empathy, and Intimacy. This study evaluates the psychometric properties of the Semi-Structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1) in Estonian. METHOD: The sample consists of 131 participants: 58 from the general population and 73 from a mixed clinical sample that is further divided into a mood and anxiety disorder sample and personality disorder sample. All participants completed the STiP-5.1 interview and the Level of Personality Functioning Scale–Brief Form (LPFS-BF 2.0). RESULTS: The Estonian STiP-5.1 interview has good internal consistency (McDonald's ω between .94–.98) and high convergent validity (correlations with LPFS-BF 2.0 above .7). Interview scores successfully differentiated the general population from the mixed clinical sample (Cohen’s d = 2.68), as well as patients with personality disorder from those without (Cohen’s d = 1.76). The LPFS-BF 2.0 total score differentiates the general population sample from the mixed clinical sample (Cohen’s d = 1.99) but not the personality disorder sample from other clinical sample participants. CONCLUSIONS: The properties of the Estonian STiP-5.1 replicate those of other languages, and empirically support a unified personality functioning dimension that can be meaningfully thought of as reflecting impairments in self and interpersonal functioning. Findings of this study will be discussed in the light of the ongoing debate on the dimensionality of personality pathology and the use of self-report versus interview measures for assessing personality pathology. BioMed Central 2022-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9714151/ /pubmed/36451191 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40479-022-00197-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Oitsalu, Maarja-Liisa
Kreegipuu, Maie
Hutsebaut, Joost
Psychometric evaluation of the Estonian version of the Semi-structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1)
title Psychometric evaluation of the Estonian version of the Semi-structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1)
title_full Psychometric evaluation of the Estonian version of the Semi-structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1)
title_fullStr Psychometric evaluation of the Estonian version of the Semi-structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1)
title_full_unstemmed Psychometric evaluation of the Estonian version of the Semi-structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1)
title_short Psychometric evaluation of the Estonian version of the Semi-structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1)
title_sort psychometric evaluation of the estonian version of the semi-structured interview for personality functioning dsm-5 (stip-5.1)
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9714151/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36451191
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40479-022-00197-7
work_keys_str_mv AT oitsalumaarjaliisa psychometricevaluationoftheestonianversionofthesemistructuredinterviewforpersonalityfunctioningdsm5stip51
AT kreegipuumaie psychometricevaluationoftheestonianversionofthesemistructuredinterviewforpersonalityfunctioningdsm5stip51
AT hutsebautjoost psychometricevaluationoftheestonianversionofthesemistructuredinterviewforpersonalityfunctioningdsm5stip51