ReviewBJPsych international2024
The epistemic injustice of borderline personality disorder.
Review in BJPsych international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Overlapping And Differentiating Clinical Features of Autism and Borderline Personality Disorder in Women and People Assigned Female at Birth: A Cross-Sectional Study.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2026Article
- Dismantling the Diagnostic Construct of Borderline Personality Disorder: A Critical Discourse Analysis.International journal of mental health nursing · 2026Article
- When psychiatry does not learn: Epistemic humility, ignorance culture, exclusion culture and diagnostic weaponisation.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- Wicked Labels, and the Power of Narrative in Mental Health Nursing.Journal of psychiatric and mental health nursing · 2025Article
- Fundamental issues in epistemic injustice in healthcare.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2025Article
- Conceptualising Lived Experience in Mental Health Research: Problems, Insights and Implications.Sociology of health & illness · 2025Review
- Neurodivergence, intersectionality, and eating disorders: a lived experience-led narrative review.Journal of eating disorders · 2024Review
- Let's talk emotions: from classification and early intervention to suicide prevention.BJPsych international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) has been a controversial diagnosis for over 40 years. It was to be removed from the latest version of the ICD, only to be reintroduced as a trait qualifier as a result of last-minute lobbying. Retaining BPD as a de facto diagnosis keeps us stuck at a deadlock that undermines the voices of patients who have persistently told us this label adds 'insult to injury'. Miranda Fricker's concept of epistemic injustice helps illuminate how this affects subjectivity and speech, hermeneutically sealing patients in ways of thinking that are not evidence-based, resulting in testimonial smothering (altering or withholding one's narratives) and testimonial quieting (dismissing a speaker's capacity to provide worthy testimony) that prevent more affirmative explanations.
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.