Abstract:Introduction: In both the ICD-11 Classification of Personality Disorders and the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) personality disorders (PD) are characterized by impairments in self- and interpersonal functioning which distinguish the various levels of dysfunction. Moreover, pathological traits are used by these classification systems to define the stylistic expression of personality dysfunction. Negative affectivity, detachment, antagonism/dissociality, and disinhibition feature as trait domains in each of these models. However, there are also differences between the two models, namely, in the psychoticism domain, which does not feature as a personality trait domain in the ICD-11, and in the anankastia domain, corresponding to compulsivity in the DSM-5, which was removed from the final AMPD model. Furthermore, facets are acknowledged by the DSM-5 within each trait domain, while this does not occur in the ICD-11. In view of the similarity between these classification systems, their harmonization would be beneficial for the clinical profession. With this goal in mind, the PID5BF + M, an algorithm that assesses the DSM-5 and ICD-11 six trait domains and 18 facets, was developed and has proven to adequately characterize the ICD-11 trait domains by means of DSM-5 trait facets. Methods: The current study compares a community sample ( N = 280, M age = 48.01, 53.2% females) with a PD sample ( N = 131, M age = 42.66, 45.0% females) along with the PID5BF + M, the LPFS-SR and the PID-5. Given that the PID5BF + M total can be seen as a measure of the level of personality dysfunction, strong relations between the PID5BF + M total and the LPFS-SR total are expected. Strong relations between the trait specifiers measured by the PID5BF + M and the PID-5 are also expected. Finally, the community and clinical samples are expected to differentiate by means of the dimensions assessed through the three afore-mentioned measures. The Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient was used to measure the strength and direction of associations between the PID5BF + M total and the LPFS-SR total and between the PID5BF + M and the PID-5 traits. Group differences were explored using the Mann–Whitney U test for independent samples. Results: As expected, there were strong, significant, and positive relations between the measures. Furthermore, higher scores were observed in all the variables for the PD group against the community group. Discussion: Although this study has limitations, its findings sustain that the PID5BF + M has potential to assess the severity of personality disfunction and to characterize the stylistic features of PD as they are conceived by both the ICD-11 and the DSM-5. Although more research is needed regarding the convergent validity of the PID5BF + M, this new test contributes to the harmonization of both systems and to parsimony in the assessment of PD, which is the main objective of clinical practice.

Verification of five‐factor models and reference scores for personality dysfunction and trait domains of the Personality Assessment Questionnaire for ICD‐11 (PAQ‐11), revised version

Reliability and validity of the Personality Disorder Severity ICD‐11 (PDS‐ICD‐11) scale and the Revised Personality Assessment Questionnaire for ICD‐11 (PAQ‐11R) in a Norwegian community sample

Examining the validity and factor structure of the ICD-11 trait domains.

Development and Validation of Dimensional Clinical Personality Inventory 2 (IDCP-2) Algorithms to Assess ICD-11 Personality Trait Domain Qualifiers

Examining the reliability and validity of the ICD-11 personality disorder severity diagnosis

Development and initial evaluation of the ICD-11 personality disorder severity scale: PDS-ICD-11.

Assessment of personality disorder in the ICD-11 diagnostic system: Polish validation of the Personality Inventory for ICD-11

Validating the German version of the Personality Disorder Severity-ICD-11 Scale using nominal response models.

Personality Inventory for DSM-5 in China: Evaluation of DSM-5 and ICD-11 Trait Structure and Continuity With Personality Disorder Types

Two-year retest reliability and predictive validity of the Self- and Informant-Personality Inventory for ICD-11 in older adults.

Self-Reported ICD-11 Personality Disorder Severity in Peruvian Adolescents: Structure, Validity, and Tentative Cutoffs

Validation of the Persian Version of the ICD-11 Compatible Personality Inventory for DSM-5– Brief Form Plus, Modified

Personality Disorders Detected by Personality Diagnosis Questionare in Patients of Psychotherapy Wards

Practical implications of ICD-11 personality disorder classifications

Bridging the ICD11 and the DSM-5 personality disorders classification systems: The role of the PID5BF + M

Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4+: A Study with Chinese College Students

Measuring ICD‐11 adjustment disorder: the development and initial validation of the International Adjustment Disorder Questionnaire

Measuring maladaptive personality traits with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM‐IV Axis II Screening Questionnaire using a common metrics approach

Testing whether the DSM-5 personality disorder trait model can be measured with a reduced set of items: An item response theory investigation of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5.

Impaired Personality Functioning in Children and Adolescents Assessed with the LoPF-Q 6-18 PR in Parent-Report and Convergence with Maladaptive Personality Traits and Personality Structure in School and Clinic Samples

Personality inventory for DSM-5 brief form(PID-5-BF) in Chinese students and patients: evaluating the five-factor model and a culturally informed six-factor model