ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2025
Psychometric Evaluation of the Borderline Personality Disorder Checklist.
Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBorderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a severe and disabling condition. The Borderline Personality Disorder Checklist (BPDCL) was designed to specifically assess the subjective burden of a patient due to BPD symptoms. Various translations have been developed, but an assessment of the psychometric properties of these translations is needed. The aim was to examine the psychometric qualities of the BPDCL across different languages (i.e., Italian, Dutch, German, Spanish, English, and Greek).
methodsSecondary data was used by reaching out to various researchers, who administered the BPDCL in previous studies. Five studies (N = 3199) conducted in Spain, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Australia, England, and Greece, were included in the current data set. The BPDCL was administered to BPD patients (N = 1131), Axis I disorder patients (N = 57), patients with other personality disorders (N = 225), and healthy controls (N = 1786). Item analyses and analyses assessing the known-groups and convergent validity were performed to investigate the psychometric properties of the checklist.
resultsEach version of the BPDCL, differing in language, demonstrated high-reliability coefficients (Cronbach's Alpha ranged from 0.93 to 0.96 and was 0.96 for the entire sample). The correlations between the BPDCL and other instruments, used in the studies, were weak to strong. Correlations greater than 0.55 were observed between the BPDCL and the scales BPDSI, SCL-90 and the BSI. In addition, the BPDCL seems to differentiate well between diagnostic groups. BPD patients scored the highest, followed by patients with other personality disorders, who in turn scored higher than Axis I disorder patients and healthy controls.
conclusionsIn general, the BPDCL possesses good psychometric properties and seems to be an adequate self-report instrument to measure the subjective burden of BPD patients.
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.