ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder: A Systematic Review of Diagnostic Distinction and Comorbidity.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe recognition of Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (CPTSD) as a distinct diagnosis in ICD-11 has intensified the need to clarify its boundaries with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), given their symptom overlap and shared traumatic origins. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to examine whether CPTSD is distinct from BPD, assess their comorbidity and symptom overlap, identify key criteria for differential diagnosis, and explore therapeutic implications.
methodA systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Seven empirical studies (2015-2025) were included, comprising 2574 adults (mean age 40.4 years; 73.3% women). Methods included latent class analysis, structural equation modeling, and network analysis. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated independently by two reviewers using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies.
resultsFindings consistently supported that CPTSD and BPD are empirically distinguishable, though substantially correlated, particularly within the ICD-11 framework. High symptom co-occurrence was observed, with affective dysregulation identified as the symptom most centrally connecting the two symptom networks. Self-concept emerged as the most robust differentiator: stable and persistently negative in CPTSD versus unstable and fragmented in BPD. Shame was a key affective marker of more severe presentations, and trauma severity, rather than diagnostic category, was associated with symptom variation across studies.
conclusionsCPTSD and BPD are distinct yet frequently co-occurring conditions. Differential diagnosis should focus on self-concept stability, patterns of behavioral dysregulation, and shame. Treatment requires individualized, trauma-informed, and shame-sensitive approaches, with transdiagnostic emotion regulation strategies across presentations. These conclusions should be interpreted with caution, given the predominantly cross-sectional design and methodological heterogeneity of the available evidence.
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.