Personality Inventory For DSM-5 Traits Research Articles

Do PID-5 Trait Scores Predict Symptom Disorders? A Meta-analytic Review.

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) has become influential in the dimensional assessment of personality dysfunction. Though most studies have examined links between PID-5 trait domains and personality pathology, a number of investigations have assessed relationships between PID-5 scores and symptom disorders (e.g., depression, anxiety). We employed meta-analytic techniques to synthesize findings in this area, identifying 26 publications assessing associations between PID-5 scores and symptom disorders (N of effect sizes across the five trait domains = 260). PID-5 domain score effect sizes (rs) ranged from 0.20 for Antagonism to 0.35 for Negative Affect (all ps < .00001). Relationships between PID-5 scores and specific forms of psychopathology were generally consistent with expectations, with some unanticipated relationships as well. Findings confirm that the pathological personality traits assessed by the PID-5 predict symptom disorders as well as personality dysfunction, extending the heuristic value and clinical utility of the measure.

Age and sex differences of the PID-5-100 maladaptive personality traits throughout adulthood.

In this cross-sectional study including a heterogeneous Belgian community sample of adults (N = 1,930), two central questions were addressed pertaining to age differences of self-reported Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) maladaptive personality traits: (a) What kind of mean-level changes occur in the PID-5 traits from age 21 to 65? and (b) What kind of variance-level changes occur in the PID-5 traits from age 21 to 65? In exploring these research questions, we also aimed to examine potential sex differences. With regard to latent mean-level age differences of the PID-5 traits, changes across adulthood were overall small to moderate and included a mix of decreasing, flat, and increasing age trends. Regarding the decreasing trends, quadratic regressions showed that the initial downward trend often either stagnated at a certain age, or subtly started increasing again from a certain age onwards. In more than half of the PID-5 traits (15/25), small but significant sex differences were found in the latent mean-level changes across adulthood. In these cases, men tended to score overall higher, except for the negative affectivity facets, on which women tended to score higher. Furthermore, variance stability was found for the majority of the PID-5 personality traits (17/25), indicating that the magnitude of individual differences in PID-5 traits is relatively stable across adulthood. Implications for individual assessment and evaluation of PID-5 scores are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Dimensional personality pathology and disordered eating in young adults: measuring the DSM-5 alternative model using the PID-5.

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) is a self-report measure of personality pathology designed to measure pathological personality traits outlined in the DSM-5 alternative model of personality disorders. Within the extensive literature exploring the relationship between personality and disordered eating, there are few that explore the relationship between the PID-5 and disordered eating behaviours in a non-clinical sample of males and females: restrictive eating, binge eating, purging, chewing and spitting, excessive exercising and muscle building. An online survey assessed disordered eating, PID-5 traits and general psychopathology and was completed by 394 female and 167 male participants aged 16-30. Simultaneous equations path models were systematically generated for each disordered eating behaviour to identify how the PID-5 scales, body dissatisfaction and age predicted behaviour. The results indicated that each of the six disordered behaviours were associated with a unique pattern of maladaptive personality traits. The statistical models differed between males and females indicating possible differences in how dimensional personality pathology and disordered eating relate. It was concluded that understanding disordered eating behaviour in the context of personality pathology may assist formulating potentially risky behaviour.

Personality Pathology and Functional Impairment in Patients With Hypochondriasis.

Research indicates substantial co-occurance of personality pathology and hypochondriasis, which both involve significant psychosocial impairment. This study sought to investigate the role of personality pathology for explaining functional impairment in patients with hypochondriasis, while accounting for the influence of health anxiety severity. Patients diagnosed with hypochondriasis (N=84; 60% women) were administered interview- and self-report instruments for personality pathology, health anxiety severity, and functional impairment (general, social, and physical): The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II (SCID-II), the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), the Short Health Anxiety Inventory (SHAI), the 36-item Short Form health survey (SF-36), and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF). Hierarchical regression analyses were performed with boot-strapping (1000 samples). Findings overall showed that personality pathology incrementally explained functional impairment over the influence of health anxiety severity. More specifically, findings revealed that the incremental effect of PID-5 trait dimensions was substantially larger than the SCID-II personality disorder criterion-count. Functional impairment was specifically associated with SCID-II symptoms of Avoidant Personality disorder and dependent personality disorder as well as PID-5 trait domains of negative affectivity, detachment, and psychoticism. The findings highlight the potential significance of personality pathology for understanding and clinical management of functional impairment in patients with hypochondriasis. The personality features that best explained functional impairment were avoidant personality disorder and dependent personality disorder and, in particular, DSM-5 and the International Classification of Diseases, 11th revision personality trait domains of negative affectivity, detachment, and psychoticism.

Where are the active ingredients for borderline personality disorder? The importance of heightened triggers, two arguments for traits, and two arguments for Criterion A.

We are grateful that insightful experts took the time to comment on our article, and we find their comments both elucidating and advancing. In response to the commentaries, we consider 3 possible locations for the active ingredients producing borderline personality disorder symptoms. First, we offer a more optimistic case that the active ingredients may be in Personality Inventory for DSM-5 traits because of the important role of heightened trigger frequency in accounting for elevated symptoms (with some caveats). Second, we support the commenters' arguments that active ingredients may be in dysfunction in the self and in relationships, as in Criterion A. Third, we offer an argument that the active ingredients may be in normal traits, but that the conception and measurement of normal traits need to be updated in light of the connection between normal traits and personality disorders. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The Hierarchical Structure and Predictive Validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 in Chinese Nonclinical Adolescents.

To evaluate the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) in Chinese nonclinical adolescents, a total of 1,442 Chinese middle school youths (Mage = 14.85, girls = 52.4%) were recruited in the present study. All the participants completed the full-length 220-item PID-5. Some participants (n = 1,003) were administered adolescents' social adjustment as a criterion measure at the same time and 236 participants took part in longitudinal assessment of the PID-5 and adolescents' social adjustment 6 months later. First, exploratory structural equation modeling analyses supported a six-factor structure of the PID-5 in our present sample. Second, Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonistic, and Disinhibition domains had positive correlations with negative social adjustment, and negative correlations with positive social adjustment concurrently and longitudinally, with the exception of Constraint and Psychoticism. Third, Cronbach's alpha for the PID-5 traits ranged from .57 to .91 in the full sample. The 6-month test-retest reliability by indexes of interclass correlation coefficient showed poor to good stability. As a whole, our findings provided preliminary evidence of the PID-5 as a reliable and valid measure of adolescents' maladaptive personality traits in mainland China.

Differences between ICD-11 PTSD and complex PTSD on DSM-5 section III personality traits

ABSTRACT Background: The formulations of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and the newly included disorder complex PTSD (CPTSD) in the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) have not been evaluated on a broad range of maladaptive personality traits. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD on maladaptive personality traits. Method: In a cross-sectional study of 106 Danish outpatients with ICD-10 PTSD, we used the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) to identify patients with either ICD-11 PTSD or CPTSD (N = 84). We utilized the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) from the alternative model of personality disorders in DSM-5, section III, to evaluate personality trait differences between ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD. Furthermore, PID-5 was also used to investigate relationships between personality traits and ICD-11 PTSD/CPTSD symptom clusters. The Life Event Checklist was used to assess traumatic experiences, and the MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview was applied to assess comorbidity. Results: Patients with ICD-11 PTSD or CPTSD had elevated scores on personality traits indicative of internalizing psychopathology. However, higher impairment levels of the trait domains Negative Affectivity (d= 0.75) and Psychoticism (d = 0.80) discriminated patients with ICD-11 CPTSD from patients with PTSD. The PID-5 trait domain Detachment was moderately positively correlated to most of the ITQ symptom clusters and, the ITQ Negative Self-concept symptom cluster showed a relatively high number of significant correlations across all the PID-5 trait domains and facets. The PID-5 domain Negative Affectivity and almost all the encompassing facets were significantly correlated with DSO symptom clusters. Conclusions: The findings demonstrate the relevance of applying dimensional assessment of personality features to study the psychopathology of ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD and potential differences. The results suggest that CPTSD is a more debilitating disorder than PTSD considering the severity of the personality features.

The Inter-Rater Reliability and Validity of the Italian Translation of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders Module I and Module II: A Preliminary Report on Consecutively Admitted Psychotherapy Outpatients.

To evaluate the reliability and convergent validity of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (SCID-5-AMPD) Module I and Module II, 88 adult psychotherapy participants were administered the Italian translations of the SCID-5-AMPD Module I and Module II, Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form (LPFS-BF), Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Self Report (LPFS-SF), Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4+ (PDQ-4+), and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Personality Disorders (SCID-5-PD) relying on a Williams crossover design. SCID-5-AMPD Module I and Module II showed excellent inter-rater reliability. In terms of convergent validity, meaningful associations were observed between SCID-5-AMPD Module I scores and self-report measures of Criterion A; similarly, SCID-5-AMPD Module II trait scores were meaningfully related to PID-5 trait scores. As a whole, our preliminary findings supported the clinical utility of DSM-5 AMPD.

A Model-Based Strategy for Interfacing Traits of the DSM-5 AMPD With Neurobiology

The DSM-5 alternative model for personality disorders (AMPD) groups traits into domains based on factor analyses of self-report data. AMPD traits may need to be configured differently to interface with neurobiology. Focusing on biobehavioral risk for externalizing problems in 334 adults, the authors used structural modeling to evaluate how well alternative configurations of AMPD traits, operationalized using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), interface with neural indicators of externalizing liability. A model specifying two correlated factors defined by traits within the PID-5 Disinhibition domain and brain-response indicators of externalizing proneness exhibited inadequate fit. However, a model using PID-5 traits with better coverage of biobehavioral externalizing liability evidenced good fit. Scores on this PID-5 trait factor, termed "PID-5 Externalizing Proneness," converged well with criterion measures of externalizing proneness and diverged from measures of threat sensitivity. Findings illustrate how AMPD traits can be configured for use in investigations of biobehavioral risk for psychopathology.

DSM-5 Personality Disorders and Traits in Patients With Severe Health Anxiety.

Severe health anxiety (SHA)/hypochondriasis (HY) is often associated with personality pathology; however, studies report inconsistent results. In general populations, 12% have a personality disorder (PD). We assessed physician-referred psychiatric outpatients with SHA enrolled for a treatment study (n = 84) with the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition (DSM-IV) axis II (SCID-II), Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), Whiteley Index 7, and Short Health Anxiety Inventory, and the healthy controls (n = 84) with PID-5 only. There were 71.4% of the patients who met criteria for PDs: avoidant (22.6%), obsessive-compulsive (16.7%), depressive (16.7%), dependent (7.1%), paranoid (3.6%), borderline (2.4%), and not otherwise specified (32.1%). Severity of personality pathology was associated with severity of health anxiety. In group comparisons, PID-5 trait domains of negative affectivity, detachment, low antagonism, and low disinhibition, and facets of anxiousness, separation insecurity, and low attention seeking emerged as unique predictors of SHA. Personality pathology is common among individuals with SHA/HY. Further research is needed to understand the nature of the relationship between health anxiety and personality pathology and to determine whether treatments that target both SHA/HY and personality pathology will improve short- and long-term outcomes.

Assessing the relationships between self‐reports of childhood adverse experiences and DSM‐5 alternative model of personality disorder traits and domains: A study on Italian community‐dwelling adults

A body of research suggests that child maltreatment may not represent an uncommon phenomenon. Adverse childhood experiences have been consistently linked to a variety of mental disorders, including personality disorder. Starting from these considerations, we aimed at testing the associations between retrospective self-reports of childhood abuse and Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) traits and domains in a sample of community-dwelling adult participants (N=369; 41.2% male). PID-5 scales yielded 63 (52.5%) rank-order correlations with self-reports of childhood abuse that were significant at Bonferroni-corrected p level (i.e. p<0.00042), with values ranging from 0.18 to 0.36. According to Fisher's z-test for correlation coefficient homogeneity, the wide majority of the correlations were reproduced across male participants and female participants. Partial rank-order correlation analyses highlighted specific personality profiles that were uniquely, albeit modestly associated with memories of childhood abuse. Confirming and extending previous findings, our results showed that retrospective reports of childhood abuse are significantly, albeit moderately associated with different dysfunctional personality traits, at least in Italian community-dwelling adults. As a whole, our data seemed to stress the importance of PID-5 traits and domains in improving our understanding of the relationships between self-reports of childhood abuse and dysfunctional personality dimensions in adulthood. © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorder Dysfunctional Personality Traits as Predictors of Self-Reported Aggression in an Italian Sample of Consecutively Admitted, Personality-Disordered Psychotherapy Patients.

In order to assess the relationships between DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) maladaptive personality traits and self-reports of aggression, 508 Italian adult participants who met at least one DSM-IV Axis II/DSM-5 Section II personality disorder (PD) diagnosis were administered the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and the Aggression Questionnaire (AQ). Analysis results showed that multiple regression results, PID-5 Hostility, Callousness, and Risk Taking trait scale scores explained a large amount of variance in AQ Physical Aggression (PA) scores. Moreover, PID-5 Hostility, Callousness, and Risk Taking explained more than 20% of the variance in the AQ Physical Aggression scale scores that was left unexplained by selected continuously scored DSM-IV Axis II/DSM-5 Section II PDs, whereas SCID-II Paranoid, Narcissistic, Borderline, and Antisocial PDs added only 4% of variance to the amount of variance in AQ Physical Aggression scores that was already explained by the PID-5 trait scale scores.

Profiling pathological narcissism according to DSM-5 domains and traits: A study on consecutively admitted Italian psychotherapy patients.

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 29(11) of Psychological Assessment (see record 2016-56886-001). In the article, several values were reversed and the mean was misreported in Table 2. The corrected table is present in the erratum.] Pathological narcissism represents a clinically relevant, albeit controversial personality construct, with multiple conceptualizations that are operationalized by different measures. Even in the recently published Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fifth Edition (DSM-5), 2 different views of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) are formulated (i.e., Section II and Section III). The DSM-5 Section III alternative PD model diagnosis of NPD is based on self and interpersonal dysfunction (Criterion A) and a profile of maladaptive personality traits (Criterion B), specifically elevated scores on Attention Seeking and Grandiosity. Given the diversity of conceptualizations of pathological narcissism, we evaluated the convergences and divergences in DSM-5 trait profiles characterizing multiple measures of narcissism in a clinical sample of 278 consecutively admitted Italian psychotherapy patients. Patients were administered the Italian versions of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and 4 measures of NPD, (a) the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI); (b) the NPD scale of the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4+; (c) the Structured Clinical Interview for Axis II Personality Disorders, Version 2.0 (SCID-II) as an observer-rated measure of NPD; and (d) the Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI). Multiple regression analyses showed that PID-5 traits explained from 13% to more than 60% of the variance in the different NPD measures. Attention Seeking was consistently associated with all measures of NPD, whereas Grandiosity was associated with some of the NPD measures. All measures of NPD were also significantly related to additional DSM-5 maladaptive traits. (PsycINFO Database Record

"Profiling pathological narcissism according to DSM-5 domains and traits: A study on consecutively admitted Italian psychotherapy Patients": Correction to Fossati et al. (2016).

Reports an error in "Profiling pathological narcissism according to DSM-5 domains and traits: A study on consecutively admitted Italian psychotherapy patients" by Andrea Fossati, Antonella Somma, Serena Borroni, Aaron L. Pincus, Kristian E. Markon and Robert F. Krueger (Psychological Assessment, Advanced Online Publication, Jun 23, 2016, np). In the article, several values were reversed and the mean was misreported in Table 2. The corrected table is present in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2016-31181-001.) Pathological narcissism represents a clinically relevant, albeit controversial personality construct, with multiple conceptualizations that are operationalized by different measures. Even in the recently published Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fifth Edition (DSM-5), 2 different views of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) are formulated (i.e., Section II and Section III). The DSM-5 Section III alternative PD model diagnosis of NPD is based on self and interpersonal dysfunction (Criterion A) and a profile of maladaptive personality traits (Criterion B), specifically elevated scores on Attention Seeking and Grandiosity. Given the diversity of conceptualizations of pathological narcissism, we evaluated the convergences and divergences in DSM-5 trait profiles characterizing multiple measures of narcissism in a clinical sample of 278 consecutively admitted Italian psychotherapy patients. Patients were administered the Italian versions of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and 4 measures of NPD, (a) the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI); (b) the NPD scale of the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4+; (c) the Structured Clinical Interview for Axis II Personality Disorders, Version 2.0 (SCID-II) as an observer-rated measure of NPD; and (d) the Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI). Multiple regression analyses showed that PID-5 traits explained from 13% to more than 60% of the variance in the different NPD measures. Attention Seeking was consistently associated with all measures of NPD, whereas Grandiosity was associated with some of the NPD measures. All measures of NPD were also significantly related to additional DSM-5 maladaptive traits. (PsycINFO Database Record

Testing relationships between DSM-5 Section III maladaptive traits and measures of self and interpersonal impairment in Italian community dwelling adults.

In order to study the relationships between DSM-5 Section III maladaptive personality traits and personality dysfunction, 312 Italian community dwelling adults completed the Italian translations of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and the Measure of Disordered Personality Functioning Scale (MDPF); participants were also administered the Iowa Personality Disorder Screen (IPDS). Consistent with previous findings, 22 (88.0%) PID-5 maladaptive trait scales showed moderate and significant correlations with MDPF Non Coping (median r value = .32), and Non Cooperativeness, (median r value = .24) scales. Regression analyses showed that PID-5 trait scales explained roughly 59% and 35% of the variance in MDPF Non Coping and Non Cooperativeness scales, respectively. PID-5 traits were significantly associated also with the IPDS total score, adjusted R2 = .45, p < .001. As a whole, our data seemed to indicate that the wide majority of the PID-5 scales showed significant relationships of at least moderate size with a self-report measure of personality dysfunction, lending further support to the criterion validity of the PID-5. (PsycINFO Database Record

Maladaptive Personality Trait Models: Validating the Five-Factor Model Maladaptive Trait Measures With the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 and NEO Personality Inventory.

Eight measures have been developed to assess maladaptive variants of the five-factor model (FFM) facets specific to personality disorders (e.g., Five-Factor Borderline Inventory [FFBI]). These measures can be used in their entirety or as facet-based scales (e.g., FFBI Affective Dysregulation) to improve the comprehensiveness of assessment of pathological personality. There are a limited number of studies examining these scales with other measures of similar traits (e.g., DSM-5 alternative model). The current study examined the FFM maladaptive scales in relation to the respective general personality traits of the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised and the pathological personality traits of the DSM-5 alternative model using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. The results indicated the FFM maladaptive trait scales predominantly converged with corresponding NEO Personality Inventory-Revised, and Personality Inventory for DSM-5 traits, providing further validity for these measures as extensions of general personality traits and evidence for their relation to the pathological trait model. Benefits and applications of the FFM maladaptive scales in clinical and research settings are discussed.

Deriving ICD-11 personality disorder domains from dsm-5 traits: initial attempt to harmonize two diagnostic systems.

The personality disorder domains proposed for the ICD-11 comprise Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Dissociality, Disinhibition, and Anankastia, which are reasonably concordant with the higher-order trait domains in the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders. We examined (i) whether designated DSM-5 trait facets can be used to describe the proposed ICD-11 trait domains, and (ii) how these ICD-11 trait features are hierarchically organized. A mixed Danish derivation sample (N=1541) of 615 psychiatric out-patients and 925 community participants along with a US replication sample (N=637) completed the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Sixteen PID-5 traits were designated to cover features of the ICD-11 trait domains. Exploratory structural equationmodeling (ESEM) analyzes showed that the designated traits were meaningfully organized in the proposed ICD-11 five-domain structure as well as other recognizable higher-order models of personality and psychopathology. Model fits revealed that the five proposed ICD-11 personality disorder domains were satisfactorily resembled, and replicated in the independent US sample. The proposed ICD-11 personality disorder domains can be accurately described using designated traits from the DSM-5 personality trait system. A scoring algorithm for the ICD-11 personality disorder domains is provided in appendix.

Reliability, Factor Structure, and Associations With Measures of Problem Relationship and Behavior of the Personality Inventory forDSM-5in a Sample of Italian Community-Dwelling Adolescents

In order to assess the reliability, factorial validity, and criterion validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) among adolescents, 1,264 Italian high school students were administered the PID-5. Participants were also administered the Questionnaire on Relationships and Substance Use as a criterion measure. In the full sample, McDonald's ω values were adequate for the PID-5 scales (median ω = .85, SD = .06), except for Suspiciousness. However, all PID-5 scales showed average inter-item correlation values in the .20-.55 range. Exploratory structural equation modeling analyses provided moderate support for the a priori model of PID-5 trait scales. Ordinal logistic regression analyses showed that selected PID-5 trait scales predicted a significant, albeit moderate (Cox & Snell R2 values ranged from .08 to .15, all ps < .001) amount of variance in Questionnaire on Relationships and Substance Use variables.

Exploring Occasion Specificity in the Assessment of DSM-5 Maladaptive Personality Traits

Abstract. The alternative classification system for personality disorders in DSM-5 features a hierarchical model of maladaptive personality traits. This trait model comprises five broad trait domains and 25 specific trait facets that can be reliably assessed using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Although there is a steadily growing literature on the validity of the PID-5, issues of temporal stability and situational influences on test scores are currently unexplored. We addressed these issues using a sample of 611 research participants who completed the PID-5 three times, with time intervals of 2 months. Latent state-trait (LST) analyses for each of the 25 PID-5 trait facets showed that, on average, 79.5% of the variance was due to stable traits (i.e., consistency), and 7.7% of the variance was due to situational factors (i.e., occasion specificity). Our findings suggest that the PID-5 trait facets predominantly capture individual differences that are stable across time.

Borderline Personality Disorder and Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5): Dimensional personality assessment with DSM-5

IntroductionBorderline personality disorder (BPD) diagnosis has been considered highly controversial. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (DSM-5) proposes an alternative hybrid diagnostic model for personality disorders (PD), and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) has adequate psychometric properties and has been widely used for the assessment of the dimensional component. MethodsOur aim was to analyze the utility of the personality traits presented in Section III of the DSM-5 for BPD diagnosis in an outpatient clinical sample, using the Spanish version of the PID-5. Two clinical samples were studied: BPD sample (n=84) and non-BPD sample (n=45). Between-sample differences in PID-5 scores were analyzed. ResultsThe BPD sample obtained significantly higher scores in most PID-5 trait facets and domains. Specifically and after regression logistic analyses, in BPD patients, the domains of Negative Affectivity and Disinhibition, and the trait facets of emotional lability, [lack of] restricted affectivity, and impulsivity were more significantly associated with BPD. ConclusionsAlthough our findings are only partially consistent with the algorithm proposed by DSM-5, we consider that the combination of the PID-5 trait domains and facets could be useful for BPD dimensional diagnosis, and could further our understanding of BPD diagnosis complexity.