Subjects were recruited by an internet ad on craigslist . The ad, which specified that we were looking for men and women between the ages of 18–60, asked: Are you extremely moody? Do you often feel distrustful of others? Do you frequently feel out of control? Are your relationships painful and difficult?
The inclusion criteria for the study were meeting the DSM-IV criteria for BPD and having a history of psychiatric treatment. The exclusion criteria for the study were: 1) ever met the DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or bipolar I disorder, 2) met criteria for a substance use disorder in the preceding month, and 3) had an estimated IQ of 70 or lower. These exclusion criteria follow standard practice in borderline research of excluding subjects whose axis I state (i.e., psychosis, mania, intoxication/withdrawal) or cognitive impairment is likely to interfere with an assessment of their more enduring personality traits or symptoms. Potential subjects were prescreened by telephone to determine if they met presumptive criteria for DSM-IV BPD as assessed by the McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI-BPD) (Zanarini, Vujanovic, Parachini, Boulanger, Frankenburg, & Hennen, 2003 (link)) or any of our exclusion criteria. The MSI-BPD is a 10-item self-report measure with a cutoff of seven or higher indicating good sensitivity (.81) and specificity (.85) for the borderline diagnosis.
Those who were not excluded were invited to participate in a face-to-face-interview. After written informed consent was obtained, four semistructured interviews of demonstrated reliability were administered to each subject: 1) the Background Information Schedule (BIS), which assesses psychosocial functioning and treatment history (Zanarini, Frankenburg, Khera, & Bleichmar, 2001 (link)), 2) the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID I) (Williams et al., 1992 ), 3) the BPD module of the Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (DIPD-IV) (Zanarini et al., 2000 (link)), and 4) the interview version of the Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder or ZAN-BPD (Zanarini, Vujanovic, Parachini, Boulanger, & Frankenburg, 2003 (link)), inquiring about symptom severity during the past week. The self-report version of the ZAN-BPD (Zanarini & Frankenburg, 2008 ) was also administered at this time.
Three separate sub-studies were then undertaken to assess the psychometric properties of the self-report ZAN-BPD. The first assessed its convergent validity, the second assessed the internal consistency/same-day test-retest reliability of this measure, and third assessed its one-week sensitivity to change.
Convergent validity was assessed using Spearman’s rho to determine the correlations between the continuous scores of the two versions of the ZAN-BPD. The internal consistency of the ZAN-BPD was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. Test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients or ICCs. Spearman’s rho was also used to assess sensitivity to change, which determined the relationship between difference scores of the two versions of the ZAN-BPD (one week post baseline value minus baseline value).
The inclusion criteria for the study were meeting the DSM-IV criteria for BPD and having a history of psychiatric treatment. The exclusion criteria for the study were: 1) ever met the DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or bipolar I disorder, 2) met criteria for a substance use disorder in the preceding month, and 3) had an estimated IQ of 70 or lower. These exclusion criteria follow standard practice in borderline research of excluding subjects whose axis I state (i.e., psychosis, mania, intoxication/withdrawal) or cognitive impairment is likely to interfere with an assessment of their more enduring personality traits or symptoms. Potential subjects were prescreened by telephone to determine if they met presumptive criteria for DSM-IV BPD as assessed by the McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI-BPD) (Zanarini, Vujanovic, Parachini, Boulanger, Frankenburg, & Hennen, 2003 (link)) or any of our exclusion criteria. The MSI-BPD is a 10-item self-report measure with a cutoff of seven or higher indicating good sensitivity (.81) and specificity (.85) for the borderline diagnosis.
Those who were not excluded were invited to participate in a face-to-face-interview. After written informed consent was obtained, four semistructured interviews of demonstrated reliability were administered to each subject: 1) the Background Information Schedule (BIS), which assesses psychosocial functioning and treatment history (Zanarini, Frankenburg, Khera, & Bleichmar, 2001 (link)), 2) the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID I) (Williams et al., 1992 ), 3) the BPD module of the Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (DIPD-IV) (Zanarini et al., 2000 (link)), and 4) the interview version of the Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder or ZAN-BPD (Zanarini, Vujanovic, Parachini, Boulanger, & Frankenburg, 2003 (link)), inquiring about symptom severity during the past week. The self-report version of the ZAN-BPD (Zanarini & Frankenburg, 2008 ) was also administered at this time.
Three separate sub-studies were then undertaken to assess the psychometric properties of the self-report ZAN-BPD. The first assessed its convergent validity, the second assessed the internal consistency/same-day test-retest reliability of this measure, and third assessed its one-week sensitivity to change.
Convergent validity was assessed using Spearman’s rho to determine the correlations between the continuous scores of the two versions of the ZAN-BPD. The internal consistency of the ZAN-BPD was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. Test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients or ICCs. Spearman’s rho was also used to assess sensitivity to change, which determined the relationship between difference scores of the two versions of the ZAN-BPD (one week post baseline value minus baseline value).
