Investigating Convergence of the ICD‐11 Personality Disorder Model and the DSM‐5's Alternative Model of Personality Disorders
- 1Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond Virginia USA
Abstract
The introduction of the DSM‐5's AMPD and the ICD‐11 PD model are demonstrative of a shift in personality disorder classification from the more traditional categorical taxonomy to dimensional diagnostic approaches. The two models possess a number of similarities, however, are also substantially different in terms of the AMPD's hybrid nature and facet structure, in addition to disparity between the anankastia and psychoticism trait domains. This narrative review attempted to ascertain whether there is convergence between the two models, in addition to improving upon previous meta‐analytical work done on the subject, by synthesizing the findings from 32 studies and examining their findings as well as their methodological quality. Similar to previous work, correlational findings from studies within the review seemed to suggest potential convergence between the two models. However, potential alternate explanations for the moderate‐to‐large effect size correlations are given. Additionally, this review's expanded look at methodological factors and other types of analyses revealed evidence which does not support convergence. Overall, the findings of the studies in this review hamper the ability to conclude that there is in fact convergence between the two models. The results of this review provide pertinent clinical and research implications, in addition to producing avenues for further research aimed at improved investigation of convergence between the AMPD and ICD‐11 PD model.
Related
- An Individual Meta‐Analysis of Psychological Treatments for Mood and Personality Disorders Using the Severity Diagnostic System of ICD‐11
- Machine Learning in the Differential Diagnosis of Bipolar and Borderline Personality Disorders: A Scoping Review
- All mental disorders as personality disorders
- Personality and cognition across the lifespan: investigating their interplay and age-related differences.
- Exploring the Feasibility of a Generic Early Intervention Programme for Emerging Personality Disorder in Adolescents: Guideline-Informed Treatment for Personality Disorders-Adolescent Version (GITPD-A).
BibTeX
@article{lutz2026investigating,
title = {{Investigating Convergence of the ICD‐11 Personality Disorder Model and the DSM‐5's Alternative Model of Personality Disorders}},
author = {Rae Lutz and Jared W. Keeley},
journal = {Personality and Mental Health},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.1002/pmh.70111},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/pmh.70111},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Investigating Convergence of the ICD‐11 Personality Disorder Model and the DSM‐5's Alternative Model of Personality Disorders
AU - Rae Lutz
AU - Jared W. Keeley
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/05
JO - Personality and Mental Health
DO - 10.1002/pmh.70111
UR - https://doi.org/10.1002/pmh.70111
AB - The introduction of the DSM‐5's AMPD and the ICD‐11 PD model are demonstrative of a shift in personality disorder classification from the more traditional categorical taxonomy to dimensional diagnostic approaches. The two models possess a number of similarities, however, are also substantially different in terms of the AMPD's hybrid nature and facet structure, in addition to disparity between the anankastia and psychoticism trait domains. This narrative review attempted to ascertain whether there is convergence between the two models, in addition to improving upon previous meta‐analytical work done on the subject, by synthesizing the findings from 32 studies and examining their findings as well as their methodological quality. Similar to previous work, correlational findings from studies within the review seemed to suggest potential convergence between the two models. However, potential alternate explanations for the moderate‐to‐large effect size correlations are given. Additionally, this review's expanded look at methodological factors and other types of analyses revealed evidence which does not support convergence. Overall, the findings of the studies in this review hamper the ability to conclude that there is in fact convergence between the two models. The results of this review provide pertinent clinical and research implications, in addition to producing avenues for further research aimed at improved investigation of convergence between the AMPD and ICD‐11 PD model.
SN - 1932-8621
SN - 1932-863X
ER -