ArticleThe British journal of clinical psychology2025
Gender bias in assessing narcissistic personality: Exploring the utility of the ICD-11 dimensional model.
Article in The British journal of clinical psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Coercive Control and Intimate Partner Violence: Relationship With Personality Disorder Severity and Pathological Narcissism.Personality and mental health · 2025Article
- Gender bias in assessing narcissistic personality: Exploring the utility of the ICD-11 dimensional model.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesNarcissistic personality disorder as captured in categorical diagnostic systems (e.g., DSM-5) emphasizes grandiose features more associated with masculine norms and under-emphasizes vulnerable features more associated with femininity. This poses significant implications in diagnostic outcome and clinical treatment in women with narcissistic preoccupations. Research finds that clinicians using the DSM-5 categorical system tend to diagnose vulnerable narcissism in women as other 'feminized' personality disorders (e.g., borderline), but no research has explored gender differences in narcissism using the new ICD-11 dimensional framework for personality disorders. This study investigated the clinical utility of the ICD-11 approach in capturing gender differences in narcissistic presentations.
methodsAdopting an online vignette-based study, mental health clinicians (N = 157; 71.3% female) completed ratings of ICD-11 personality disorder severity and trait domains for two cases reflecting 'grandiose' and 'vulnerable' narcissism in hypothetical male or female patients.
resultsThe results showed that ratings of core impairments in personality functioning and overall severity were consistent irrespective of patient or clinician gender, contrasting prior research using categorical models.
conclusionWhile some differences were observed in trait domain (e.g., negative affectivity) between patient gender, these results suggest the clinical utility of the ICD-11 model as emphasizing elements of personality functioning in the process of assessment and diagnosis, therefore potentially being less susceptible to influences of gender stereotype in aiding clinical conceptualization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.