Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42247633›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical psychology2026

Psychometric Evaluation of the Norwegian Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale in a Multi-Site Sample of Patients With Personality Disorders and Personality Problems.

Geir Pedersen, Benjamin Hummelen, Sebastian Gulbrandsen, Kai Leitemo, Eileen Oftedal, Alexandra Tenebroso, Katharina T E Morken, Kenneth Lindberget, Dag Anders Ulvestad, Theresa Wilberg and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

11 authors.

Geir PedersenDepartment of Research and Innovation, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8599-8871
Benjamin HummelenORCID 0000-0002-8717-8076
Sebastian GulbrandsenSection for Group Treatment, Kronstad District Psychiatric Center, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0009-0005-7149-4145
Kai LeitemoSection for Group Treatment, Centre for Mental Health and Addiction, Lovisenberg Diaconal Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-4544-0558
Eileen OftedalDivision of Adult Mental Health Care, Group Outpatient Clinic, Stavanger District Psychiatric Center, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8738-024X
Alexandra TenebrosoFekjær Psychiatric Center, South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority, Hamar, Norway.
Katharina T E MorkenDepartment of Addiction Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-4158-4829
Kenneth LindbergetDistrict Psychiatric Center Strømme, Sørlandet Hospital, Kristiansand, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Dag Anders UlvestadOutpatient Clinic for Specialized Treatment of Personality Disorders, Nydalen District Psychiatric Center, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-3633-3117
Theresa WilbergDepartment of Research and Innovation, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-4700-0388
Elfrida H KvarsteinDepartment of Research and Innovation, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-9221-4249

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe validity and psychometric qualities of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) in populations with a broader range of personality disorders (PDs) are still unclear. The aim of the current study was to analyze the factor structure and validity of DERS and two of its short-forms (DERS-SF and DERS-18), their relation to PD features and personality functioning, gender differences, and the overlap between concepts of alexithymia and emotion regulation.

methodData were extracted from a multi-site clinical sample of patients with PDs or personality related problems referred to specialist mental health services (n = 2093). Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA)-specifically first-order correlated and bifactor analysis, as well as analysis of measurement invariance-were applied. Linear associations and group differences were investigated by correlational analysis and independent samples t-tests. DERS and its shortforms were validated through associations with PD features (PD criteria), measures of personality functioning (LPFS-BF), and alexithymia (TAS-20).

resultsCFA of the short forms revealed good model fit, while the full version of DERS showed poorer fit. None of the bifactor analyses supported a strong general factor. Gender differences were prominent, and substantial associations were found between DERS and PD criteria, LPFS-BF, and TAS-20.

conclusionDERS and its short forms demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity in a sample of patients with PDs and personality related problems. Without support for a general factor, interpretation of the total scores of DERS should be conducted with care, especially if the subscales Awareness and Clarity are included. Given the advantages of the short forms, the selection of one version over another seems to be of limited consequence.

Indexed as

Affective SymptomsEmotional RegulationPersonality DisordersPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychometricsAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNorwayReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adultbifactor analysisDERSemotion dysregulationpersonality disordervalidity

Identifiers

PMID42247633
PMCPMC13441393

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.