Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40654158›Full record

ArticlePersonality and mental health2025

An Investigation of Longitudinal Measurement Invariance and Item Response Theory Analysis of the LPFS-BF 2.0 in a Large Clinical Norwegian Sample.

Muirne C S Paap, Sebastian A J Lortz, Benjamin Hummelen, Jane Fjermestad-Noll, Elfrida H Kvarstein, Geir Pedersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Personality and mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Muirne C S PaapDepartment of Child and Family Welfare, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1173-7070
Sebastian A J LortzDepartment of Child and Family Welfare, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0007-0281-7996
Benjamin HummelenDepartment of Research and Innovation, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8717-8076
Jane Fjermestad-NollOutpatient Clinic for Personality Disorders, Nydalen District Psychiatric Center, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Elfrida H KvarsteinDepartment of Research and Innovation, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-9221-4249
Geir PedersenDepartment of Research and Innovation, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8599-8871

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The LPFS-BF 2.0 (Level of Personality Functioning-Brief Form 2.0) is a brief self-report instrument that was developed in order to gain a quick first impression of personality dysfunction and was designed to align with the Level of Personality Scale as outlined in the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD). In the current study, we used a factor analytic framework to evaluate the longitudinal measurement invariance of the Norwegian version of the LPFS-BF 2.0 in a sample of 1030 patients referred for personality disorder treatment with the R package lavaan. Additionally, we estimated item response theory (IRT) parameters for the 12 items, as well as local reliability, in order to facilitate comparisons with other studies. We found support for partial measurement invariance. Three items showed different thresholds across time points. However, these differences were minor and did not have a substantial impact on the estimated factor scores. The discrimination parameters were lower than could be expected for an instrument used in a clinical setting. Taking these findings together, we conclude that although the LPFS-BF 2.0 seems to measure the same latent trait across time, the items do not discriminate well between patients with high and low scores in a Norwegian population of adults seeking treatment for PD. Important next steps would be to estimate IRT parameters for comparable patient samples from other countries to assess the generalizability of our findings and to compare the LPFS-BF 2.0 scores to scores obtained through a clinical interview that aligns with the AMPD.

Indexed as

Personality DisordersPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesAdultFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedNorwayPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSelf ReportYoung Adultalternative model for personality disorderslevel of personality functioninglongitudinal measurement invariancepersonality problemsself‐report

Identifiers

PMID40654158
PMCPMC12257444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.