ArticleJournal of clinical psychology2026
Expert Clinician Insights Into the Diagnosis and Treatment of Men With Antisocial and Borderline Personality Disorder: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Journal of clinical psychology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesMen with presentations consistent with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) are highly visible in community and forensic services. However, mis/underdiagnosis may be a consequence of their lower than expected engagement with mental health services, and when they do engage, systematised diagnostic biases may inaccurately differentiate these two subtypes. Given the substantial harms experienced by men who have personality disorder (PD), it is important to understand how personality disorder can be better identified and supported in clinical and forensic settings.
methodsTen nationally and internationally recognised clinician participants who have expertise in the diagnosis and treatment of men with PD (80% male; 60% psychologists, 40% psychiatrists) participated in individual, semi-structured qualitative interviews. Participants shared their observations regarding PD presentations in men and recommendations for maximising treatment engagement in community and forensic settings. Transcripts from the 60-90-min interviews were analysed using inductive and deductive thematic analysis.
resultsThe analysis identified four themes: Getting men through the door, Unmasking Complexity, Holding Steady in the Face of Risk, and Addressing Shame through Connection. Men with BPD tend to under-report their symptoms and distrust mental health services. Clinicians may struggle to differentiate BPD from ASPD, as men's emotional dysregulation often manifests as anger. Participants emphasised appealing to the person's self-interest, building a trusting therapeutic alliance, and carefully addressing shame to facilitate treatment engagement.
conclusionsHalf of the expert clinicians were employed in forensic settings where men with BPD are disproportionately prevalent, rendering their perspectives especially valuable. Assessment of empathetic functioning can help counterbalance clinicians' overemphasis on aggressive behaviours when differentiating BPD from ASPD in men. Incorporation of gendered attributes and targeting associated defensive barriers may improve treatment engagement and effectiveness for men with personality disorder.
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.