Published case studies on the DSM‐5 (section III) Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) generally utilized unstandardized assessment procedures or mono‐method approaches. We present a case from clinical practice to illustrate a standardized, clinically feasible procedure for assessing personality pathology according to the full AMPD model, using a multi‐method approach. We aim to present a procedure that can guide and inspire clinicians that are going to work with dimensional models as presented in DSM‐5 and ICD‐11. Specifically, we show how questionnaire and interview data from multiple sources (i.e. patient and family) can be combined. The clinical case also illustrates how Criterion A (i.e. functioning) and B (i.e. traits) are interrelated, suggesting that the joint assessment of both Criterion A and B is necessary for a comprehensive and clinically relevant case formulation. It also highlights how multi‐method information can enhance diagnostic formulations. Finally, we show how the AMPD model can serve treatment planning and provide suggestions for how patient feedback might be delivered. © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

中文翻译：

---

为人格障碍评估程序编写DSM-5替代模型的脚本：一种临床可行的多信息多方法方法。

有关DSM-5（第III节）人格障碍替代模型（AMPD）的已发表案例研究通常使用非标准化评估程序或单方法方法。我们从临床实践中介绍一个案例，以说明采用多方法方法根据完整AMPD模型评估人格病理的标准化，临床可行程序。我们旨在提出一种程序，该程序可以指导和启发将要使用DSM-5和ICD-11中介绍的尺寸模型的临床医生。具体来说，我们展示了如何将来自多个来源（即患者和家庭）的问卷调查和访谈数据进行组合。临床案例还说明了标准A（即功能）和标准B（即性状）如何相互关联，这表明对标准A和标准B进行联合评估对于全面和临床相关的案例制定是必要的。它还强调了多方法信息如何增强诊断公式。最后，我们展示了AMPD模型如何服务于治疗计划，并就如何提供患者反馈提供了建议。分级为4 +©2020 John Wiley＆Sons，Ltd.