Skip to main content
Full access
Influential Publications
Published Online: 25 October 2022

Five Failures and Five Challenges for Prevention and Early Intervention for Personality Disorder

Abstract

Despite global consensus regarding the early detection of personality disorder, current approaches to early intervention have failed to deliver for the majority of young people. This only serves to reinforce the enduring effects of personality disorder on functioning, mental and physical health, resulting in a reduction of quality of life and life expectancy. Here, we describe five significant challenges facing prevention and early intervention for personality disorder: identification, access to treatment, research translation, innovation and functional recovery. These challenges highlight the need for early intervention to shift from niche programmes in specialist services for a select few young people to become established in mainstream primary care and specialist youth mental health services.
Reprinted from Curr Opin Psychol 2021; 37:134–138, with permission from Elsevier. Copyright © 2021

Introduction

There is now a broad evidence-based consensus that personality disorder is a reliable, valid, common and treatable mental disorder, with adverse and severe personal, social and economic consequences that include persistent functional disability, high family and carer burden, vocational disengagement and unemployment, physical ill-health, a greater burden of mental disorders and recurrent self-harm [1]. A personality disorder is associated with a nearly two-decade reduction in life expectancy [2, 3], and young people with personality disorder have a ten-fold increased mortality rate compared with the general population [3]. Moreover, the associated poor short-term and long-term outcomes for young people are evident regardless of whether they meet the DSM-5 diagnostic threshold or have ‘subthreshold’ features of borderline personality disorder (BPD) [4, 5].
Despite these damning statistics and many advances in understanding and treating personality disorder, early intervention for personality disorder has not delivered for the vast majority of young people. While many of these failures are shared in common with other mental disorders [6], personality disorder finds itself uniquely discriminated against [7] and excluded from major policy initiatives, such as the Global Burden of Disease [8] or efforts to reduce excess mortality in people with severe mental disorders [9]. In this paper, we outline five ‘failures’, which represent future challenges for prevention and early intervention for people with a personality disorder. For the purpose of this paper, we use the term borderline and severe personality disorder interchangeably [10].

1) Failure of Identification

The clinical onset and peak prevalence of personality disorder both occur in adolescence and young adulthood [1]. The cumulative prevalence of any personality disorder from age 14–22 is 25.7% [11]. By age 24, almost one-fifth of young people with have a personality disorder, with one-fifth of these people having severe personality disorder [12]. Although people with personality disorder are high utilisers of health services, nondiagnosis or delay in diagnosis is the norm, especially in young people [1, 13], where only 1% of young people attending a national primary care youth mental health service network had a primary diagnosis of BPD or ‘borderline traits’ recorded [13]. Evidence suggests that the true prevalence of BPD in primary care is likely to be 4 to 82 times higher than recorded [14, 15].
Early intervention refers to the stage of the disorder, rather than the chronological or developmental age of the person with personality disorder [16]. Its success is dependent upon a reliable and coherent method of early detection during this developmental period, across all healthcare settings. Such a detection system needs to recognise the continuity of personality disorder with other psychopathology and with normality [17]. Consistent with other international early intervention programmes in youth mental health, the epidemiology of the onset of the major mental disorders, normative development [18] and contemporary developmental neuroscience [19], an age range of 12–25 years ‘young people’ has been proposed for early intervention services [20]. Hitherto, the focus for early intervention in personality disorder has been on ‘adolescents’, with 18–25 year-olds falling through the gaps in service systems because they have limited access to ‘adult’ mental health services.

2) Access Failure

Even when identified, referrals to specialist personality disorder care are infrequent [21]. Although effective specialised psychosocial treatments exist for personality disorder [22], they are usually only offered in the wake of longstanding and severe problems ‘late intervention’, jeopardising their effectiveness and waiting lists are common [23]. Moreover, even under ideal clinical trial conditions, poor client engagement is common, with drop out rates usually ranging from a quarter to half of the participants [e.g., Ref. [24, 25]].
In addition, the treatment offered must be appropriate to the stage of the disorder. Clinical staging models that include personality pathology [26, 27] allow for transdiagnostic treatment regimens to be tailored to the needs of the individual and are consistent with trends in classification reflected in the ICD-11 and DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorder [28, 29].
Primary care treatment for young people with a personality disorder is inconsistent and lacks an evidence base. Recently published Australian data demonstrate that the current offerings for young people with BPD in primary care are inadequate and frequently ineffective [13]. Less than 1% of young people had a primary diagnosis of BPD or borderline traits. The engagement was poor, with a mean of 3.44 (SD 2.64) sessions. Interventions ranged from supportive counselling to narrative therapy, with the most common being CBT, delivered to only 28% by session 3. Quality of life, distress and social and occupational functioning scores showed no improvement or deterioration in 69%, 60% and 45%, respectively, suggesting that usual practice is failing this patient group.

3) Research Translation Failure

The delay between treatment innovations and their implementation across mental health services is up to 17 years [30]. Evidence-based therapies for personality disorder have been difficult to implement within health services due to time commitment, staff and financial resource availability and lack of organisational support. Programmes commonly fail in the real world [3135]. An implementation science approach can improve the chances of success, but these skills are lacking in mainstream practice.

4) Innovation Failure

Psychosocial treatments for personality disorder have remained largely unchanged for the past four decades, being limited to office-based, individual or group psychotherapies that have rigid and/or restrictive entry criteria, are technically complex and require lengthy training. This leads to workforce capacity constraints and limited access to services because treatments are not ‘scalable’. Crucially, such models of care are particularly unsuited to young people because of their inflexibility and also because of their limited ability to address co-occurring psychopathology and psychosocial problems, which are common among this age group.
Over a decade ago, we reported that structured Good Clinical Care (GCC), which included problem-solving and clinical case management, was effective in substantially improving psychopathology, self-harm and suicidal behaviour and social and occupational functioning in 15–18 year-olds with 2–9 DSM-IV BPD features [36]. Subsequently, other clinical trials have demonstrated the effectiveness of high-quality, structured care, leading the Cochrane and other systematic reviews to conclude that specialised therapies do not appear to be superior to other forms of structured clinical care among adult or adolescent populations, particularly in the longer term [22]. Such conclusions suggest room for innovation in the ‘format’ and ‘target’ of treatment [6].
Innovations might include digital and/or family interventions [e.g., Ref. [37]], along with using novel workforces for treatment, such as peer workers. The latter are people who have lived experience of mental illness and are trained to use that experience to function in various roles, such as providing case management, facilitating groups, or providing direct support to consumers. Peer involvement in delivering mental health care is a priority identified by consumers with personality disorder, their family and friends ‘carers’ and treating clinicians [38, 39]. Peer workers actively model recovery and provide hope for individuals in treatment while providing a validating voice and practical support. Peer work has the potential to provide a much-needed avenue for improved access to care, engagement and importantly, hope for a meaningful recovery. While some studies of formal peer support in mental health settings have shown promising outcomes, the lack of structured, measurable programmes makes these difficult to interpret and implement [40, 41].
‘Carers’ (friends, family members, guardians) of adults with BPD report greater negative experiences of care and lower mental wellbeing than carers of those with other severe mental illness, including psychotic and mood disorders [42]. While studies involving carers of young people with BPD are scarce, they describe similar patterns of burden and psychological distress [43, 44]. Carer interventions have proved effective in studies of young people with first-episode psychosis [45, 46] and suicidal behaviour [47], and psychoeducation has proved effective in reducing subjective burden in carers of young people with BPD [43]. Despite this, carer interventions are not routinely offered alongside treatment for BPD, and the lack of research in this area leaves a question mark as to what may be effective.

5) Functional Recovery Failure

Existing interventions have limited impact on key domains of functional recovery such as social connectedness, employment or quality of life [48]. Not only are these deficits the most disabling and costly aspect of personality disorder, but also achieving functional recovery is the most valued goal for young people and their families.
Self-harm and suicide are common treatment targets and measured outcomes in BPD research. This suggests that, often, the bar for the effectiveness of treatment is only set at ‘survival’, and not necessarily meaningful survival, or quality of life. No study has shown that reducing self-harm protects individuals from suicide, and neither severity nor frequency of self-harm appears to be predictive of suicide attempt frequency in young people with BPD [49]. Longitudinal studies have shown that functional impairments in those with BPD persist, even when diagnostic ‘remission’ is achieved, whether through treatment or natural attenuation of diagnostic criteria [50, 51]. To date, no treatment has proven effective at producing durable, functional improvements in BPD [52]. Yet, functional impairments, such as unemployment, in young people can have long term ‘scarring’ effects, with reduced labour market attachment and increased risk of future unemployment [53]. Danish national data show that, compared with all other psychiatric disorders, ‘first-admission’ patients with BPD have 32% lower odds of being in work or education after 9 years [54]. At the time of writing, the global COVID-19 pandemic is expected to have widespread detrimental effects upon mental health [55], and the negative effects of COVID-19 restrictions are expected to continue in young people, even when enforced isolation ends [56]. COVID-19 associated mental health risks are likely to have the greatest impact on people who are already disadvantaged or marginalised [57]. Massive job losses have already occurred, and it is expected that up to 25 million people globally could face unemployment in the resultant recession [58], with the majority of primary, secondary and tertiary education sectors facing significant challenges and downturns [59]. Young people are particularly vulnerable to the threat of unemployment and face prolonged detachment from the labour market [60]. Young people with existing mental health difficulties, such as personality disorder, are at great risk of economic exclusion and marginalisation, and protracted disengagement from employment further increases long-term mental health risks [61]. Early intervention strategies that include a targeted vocational response are needed to mitigate the potentially disastrous consequences of this economic crisis on the mental health of young people with personality disorders [48].

Conclusion

While early intervention for personality disorder has come of age, it needs to move beyond the ghetto of niche programmes in specialist services for a select few young people to become established in mainstream youth mental health services across primary care and specialist mental health settings. Five challenges that must be overcome in order to establish effective and scalable early intervention strategies for personality disorders are identification, access, translation/implementation, innovation and functional recovery. Researchers and service providers should work with young people, their families and friends to address these challenges in order to ensure effective innovation and implementation of early intervention for personality disorder at all levels of health systems. Improving the effectiveness of early intervention for a personality disorder is a matter of urgency, given the likely disproportionate adverse effects that the COVID-19 recession will have on young people with personality disorders.

Footnote

Author contributions: Andrew Chanen: Conceptualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review and editing; Katie Nicol: Writing original draft, Writing - review and editing.

References

1.
Chanen A, Sharp C, Hoffman P: Global alliance for prevention and early intervention for borderline personality disorder. Prevention and early intervention for borderline personality disorder: a novel public health priority. World Psychiatr 2017, 16:215–216.
2.
Nordentoft M, Wahlbeck K, Hällgren J, Westman J, Osby U, Alinaghizadeh H, Gissler M, TMI Laursen: Excess mortality, causes of death and life expectancy in 270,770 patients with recent onset of mental disorders in Denmark, Finland and Sweden. PLoS One 2013, 8, e55176.
3.
Fok ML-Y, Hayes RD, Chang C-K, Stewart R, Callard FJ, Moran P: Life expectancy at birth and all-cause mortality among people with personality disorder. J Psychosom Res 2012, 73:104–107.
4.
Thompson KN, Jackson H, Cavelti M, Betts J, McCutcheon L, Jovev M, Chanen AM: The clinical significance of subthreshold borderline personality disorder features in outpatient youth. J Pers Disord 2018:1–11.
5.
Winograd G, Cohen P, Chen H: Adolescent borderline symptoms in the community: prognosis for functioning over 20 years. JCPP (J Child Psychol Psychiatry) 2008, 49:933–941.
6.
Alvarez-Jimenez M, Amminger GP, Berger M, Gleeson J, Chanen AM: Novel modalities for assessment and intervention in youth mental health. In Youth mental health: a paradigm for prevention and early intervention. Edited by Uhlhaas PJ, Wood SJ, MIT Press; 2020:157–173.
7.
Tyrer P: Why we need to take personality disorder out of the doghouse. Br J Psychiatry 2020, 216:65–66.
8.
Vigo D, Thornicroft G, Atun R: Estimating the true global burden of mental illness. Lancet Psychiatr 2016, 3:171–178.
9.
Liu NH, Daumit GL, Dua T, Aquila R, Charlson F, Cuijpers P, Druss B, Dudek K, Freeman M, Fujii C, et al.: Excess mortality in persons with severe mental disorders: a multilevel intervention framework and priorities for clinical practice, policy and research agendas. World Psychiatr 2017, 16:30–40.
10.
Sharp C, Wright AGC, Fowler JC, Frueh BC, Allen JG, Oldham J, Clark LA: The structure of personality pathology: both general (’g’) and specific (’s’) factors? J Abnorm Psychol 2015, 124(2): 387–398.
11.
Johnson JG, Cohen P, Kasen S, Skodol AE, Oldham JM: Cumulative prevalence of personality disorders between adolescence and adulthood. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2008, 118: 410–413.
12.
Moran P, Coffey C, Mann A, Carlin JB, Patton GC: Personality and substance use disorders in young adults. Br J Psychiatry 2006, 188:374–379.
13.
O’Dwyer N, Rickwood D, Buckmaster D, Watsford C: Therapeutic interventions in Australian primary care, youth mental health settings for young people with borderline personality disorder or borderline traits. BorderLine Pers Disord Emot Dysregul 2020, 7:23.
14.
Gross R, Olfson M, Gameroff M, Shea S, Feder A, Fuentes M, Lantigua R, Weissman MM: Borderline personality disorder in primary care. Arch Intern Med 2002, 162:53–60.
15.
Aragonès E, Salvador-Carulla L, López-Muntaner J, Ferrer M, Piñol JL: Registered prevalence of borderline personality disorder in primary care databases. Gac Sanit 2013, 27: 171–174.
16.
Chanen AM, Thompson KN: Early intervention for personality disorder. Curr Opin Psychol 2018, 21:132–135.
17.
Newton-Howes G, Clark LA, Chanen A: Personality disorder across the life course. Lancet 2015, 385:727–734.
18.
Sawyer SM, Azzopardi PS, Wickremarathne D, Patton GC: The age of adolescence. Lancet Child Adolesc Health 2018, 2: 223–228.
19.
Dahl RE, Allen NB, Wilbrecht L, Suleiman AB: Importance of investing in adolescence from a developmental science perspective. Nature 2018, 554:441–450.
20.
Chanen AM, Nicol K, Betts JK, Thompson KN: Diagnosis and treatment of borderline personality disorder in young people. Curr Psychiatr Rep 2020, 22:25.
21.
Moran P, Rendu A, Jenkins R, Tylee A, Mann A: The impact of personality disorder in UK primary care: a 1-year follow-up of attenders. Psychol Med 2001, 31:1447–1454.
22.
Storebø OJ, Stoffers-Winterling JM, Völlm BA, Kongerslev MT, Mattivi JT, Jørgensen MS, Faltinsen E, Todorovac A, Sales CP, Callesen HE, et al.: Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020, 5, CD012955.
23.
Chanen AM: Borderline personality disorder in young people: are we there yet? J Clin Psychol 2015, 71:778–791.
24.
Linehan MM, Korslund KE, Harned MS, Gallop RJ, Lungu A, Neacsiu AD, McDavid J, Comtois KA, Murray-Gregory AM: Dialectical behavior therapy for high suicide risk in individuals with borderline personality disorder: a randomized clinical trial and component analysis. JAMA Psychiatry 2015, 72: 475–482.
25.
Bateman A, Fonagy P: Randomized controlled trial of outpatient mentalization-based treatment versus structured clinical management for borderline personality disorder. Am J Psychiatr 2009, 166:1355–1364.
26.
Chanen AM, Berk M, Thompson K: Integrating early intervention for borderline personality disorder and mood disorders. Harv Rev Psychiatr 2016, 24:330–341.
27.
Hutsebaut J, Videler AC, Verheul R, Van Alphen SPJ: Managing borderline personality disorder from a life course perspective: clinical staging and health management. Personal Disord 2019, 10:309–316.
28.
Tyrer P, Mulder R, Kim Y-R, Crawford MJ: The development of the ICD-11 classification of personality disorders: an amalgam of science, pragmatism, and politics. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 2019, 15:481–502.
29.
Skodol AE: Personality disorders in DSM-5. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 2012, 8:317–344, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032511-143131.
30.
Mohr DC, Riper H, Schueller SM: A solution-focused research approach to achieve an implementable revolution in digital mental health. JAMA Psychiatry 2018, 75: 113–114.
31.
Herschell AD, Kogan JN, Celedonia KL, Gavin JG, Stein BD:Understanding community mental health administrators' perspectives on dialectical behavior therapy implementation. Psychiatr Serv 2009, 60:989–992.
32.
Swales MA, Taylor B, Hibbs RAB: Implementing Dialectical Behaviour Therapy: programme survival in routine healthcare settings. J Ment Health 2012, 21:548–555.
33.
Carmel A, Rose ML, Fruzzetti AE: Barriers and solutions to implementing dialectical behavior therapy in a public behavioral health system. Adm Pol Ment Health 2014, 41: 608–614, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0504-6.
34.
King JC, Hibbs R, Saville CWN, Swales MA: The survivability of dialectical behaviour therapy programmes: a mixed methods analysis of barriers and facilitators to implementation within UK healthcare settings. BMC Psychiatr 2018, 18:302.
35.
Flynn D, Joyce M, Gillespie C, Kells M, Swales M, Spillane A, Hurley J, Hayes A, Gallagher E, Arensman E, Weihrauch M: Evaluating the national multisite implementation of dialectical behaviour therapy in a community setting: a mixed methods approach. BMC Psychiatr 2020, 20, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-02610-3.
36.
Chanen AM, Jackson HJ, McCutcheon LK, Jovev M, Dudgeon P, Yuen HP, Germano D, Nistico H, McDougall E, Weinstein C, et al.: Early intervention for adolescents with borderline personality disorder using cognitive analytic therapy: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry 2008, 193:477–484.
37.
Gleeson J, Alvarez-Jimenez M, Betts JK, McCutcheon L, Jovev M, Lederman R, Herrman H, Cotton SM, Bendall S, McKechnie B, et al.: A pilot trial of moderated online social therapy for family and friends of young people with borderline personality disorder features. Early Interv Psychiatr 2020, https://doi.org/10.1111/eip.13094.
38.
Barr KR, Townsend ML, Grenyer BFS: Using peer workers with lived experience to support the treatment of borderline personality disorder: a qualitative study of consumer, carer and clinician perspectives. BorderLine Pers Disord Emot Dysregul 2020, 7:20.
39.
Ng F, Townsend ML, Jewell M, Marceau EM, Grenyer BFS: Priorities for service improvement in personality disorder in Australia: perspectives of consumers, carers and clinicians. Personal Ment Health 2020, https://doi.org/10.1002/pmh.1485.
40.
Cabassa LJ, Camacho D, Vélez-Grau CM, Stefancic A: Peerbased health interventions for people with serious mental illness: a systematic literature review. J Psychiatr Res 2017, 84:80–89.
41.
Shin S, Choi H: A systematic review on peer support services related to the mental health services utilization for people with severe mental illness. J Korean Acad Psychiatr Mental Health Nurs 2020, 29:51–63, https://doi.org/10.12934/ jkpmhn.2020.29.1.51.
42.
Bailey RC, Grenyer BFS: Burden and support needs of carers of persons with borderline personality disorder: a systematic review. Harv Rev Psychiatr 2013, 21:248–258.
43.
Pearce J, Jovev M, Hulbert C, McKechnie B, McCutcheon L, Betts J, Chanen AM: Evaluation of a psychoeducational group intervention for family and friends of youth with borderline personality disorder. Borderline Personal Disorder Emot Dysregulat 2017, 4, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40479-017-0056-6.
44.
Seigerman MR, Betts JK, Hulbert C, McKechnie B, Rayner VK, Jovev M, Cotton SM, McCutcheon L, Catharine McNab, Burke E, Chanen AM: A study comparing the experiences of family and friends of young people with borderline personality disorder features with family and friends of young people with other serious illnesses and general population adults. Borderline Personal Disorder Emot Dysregulat 2020, 7, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40479-020-00128-4.
45.
Addington J, McCleery A, Addington D: Three-year outcome of family work in an early psychosis program. Schizophr Res 2005, 79:107–116, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2005.03.019.
46.
Gleeson JFM, Cotton SM, Alvarez-Jimenez M, Wade D, Crisp K, Newman B, Spiliotacopoulos D, McGorry P: Family outcomes from a randomized control trial of relapse prevention therapy in first-episode psychosis. J Clin Psychiatr 2010, 71:475–483.
47.
Pineda J, Dadds MR: Family intervention for adolescents with suicidal behavior: a randomized controlled trial and mediation analysis. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2013, 52: 851–862.
48.
Chanen AM, Nicol K, Betts JK, Bond GR, Mihalopoulos C, Jackson HJ, Thompson KN, Jovev M, Yuen HP, Chinnery G, et al.: INdividual Vocational and Educational Support Trial (INVEST) for young people with borderline personality disorder: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2020, 21:583.
49.
Andrewes HE, Hulbert C, Cotton SM, Betts J, Chanen AM: Relationships between the frequency and severity of non-suicidal self-injury and suicide attempts in youth with borderline personality disorder. Early Interv Psychiatr 2017, 13(2): 194–201.
50.
Álvarez-Tomás I, Ruiz J, Guilera G, Bados A: Long-term clinical and functional course of borderline personality disorder: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. Eur Psychiatr 2019, 56: 75–83.
51.
Gunderson JG, Stout RL, McGlashan TH, Shea MT, Morey LC, Grilo CM, Zanarinin MC, Yen S, Markowitz JC, Sansislow C, et al.: Ten-year course of borderline personality disorder: psychopathology and function from the Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders study. Arch Gen Psychiatr 2011, 68: 827–837.
52.
Bateman AW, Gunderson J, Mulder R: Treatment of personality disorder. Lancet 2015, 385:735–743.
53.
Nilsen ØA, Reiso KH: Scarring effects of unemployment. NHH Dept. of Economics Discussion Paper. 2011, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1972294.
54.
Hastrup LH, Jennum P, Ibsen R, Kjellberg J, Simonsen E: Societal costs of Borderline Personality Disorders: a matchedcontrolled nationwide study of patients and spouses. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2019, 140:458–467.
55.
Deady M, Tan L, Kugenthiran N, Collins D, Christensen H, Harvey SB: Unemployment, suicide and COVID-19: using the evidence to plan for prevention. Med J Aust 2020, https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.50715.
56.
Loades ME, Chatburn E, Higson-Sweeney N, Reynolds S, Shafran R, Brigden A, Linney C, McManus MN, Borwick C, Crawley E: Rapid systematic review: the impact of social isolation and loneliness on the mental health of children and adolescents in the context of COVID-19. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jaac.2020.05.009.
57.
Fegert JM, Vitiello B, Plener PL, Clemens V: Challenges and burden of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: a narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Ment Health 2020:14, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-020-003293.
58.
Kawohl W, Nordt C: COVID-19, unemployment, and suicide. Lancet Psychiatr 2020, 7:389–390.
59.
Nicola M, Alsafi Z, Sohrabi C, Kerwan A, Al-Jabir A, Iosifidis C, Agha M, Agha R: The socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19): a review. Int J Surg 2020, 78:185–193.
60.
Blustein DL, Duffy R, Ferreira JA, Cohen-Scali V, Cinamon RG, Allan BA: Unemployment in the time of COVID-19: a research agenda. J Vocat Behav 2020:103436.
61.
Scott J, Fowler D, McGorry P, Birchwood M, Killackey E, Christensen H, Glozier N, Yung A, Power P, Nordentoft M, et al.: Adolescents and young adults who are not in employment, education, or training. BMJ 2013, 347, https://doi.org/10.1136/ bmj.f5270. f5270–f5270.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

History

Published in print: Fall 2022
Published online: 25 October 2022

Keywords

  1. Personality disorder
  2. Prevention
  3. Early intervention
  4. Clinical staging
  5. Adolescence
  6. Psychiatry

Authors

Details

Andrew M. Chanen [email protected]
Orygen, Melbourne, Australia, and Centre for Youth Mental Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia
Katie Nicol
Orygen, Melbourne, Australia, and Centre for Youth Mental Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia

Notes

Corresponding author: Chanen, Andrew M. ([email protected]).

Competing Interests

Conflict of interest statement: Nothing declared.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format
Citation style
Style
Copy to clipboard

View Options

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/EPUB

Login options

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens login
Purchase Options

Purchase this article to access the full text.

PPV Articles - Focus

PPV Articles - Focus

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share