{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025616698292220113, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007590132827324478, 'mean_word_length': 5.719745222929936, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Patients' versus informants' reports of personality disorders in predicting 7 1/2-year outcome in outpatients with depressive disorders.

Concordance between patients' and informants' reports of personality disorders (PDs) is low, raising the questions of which source provides more valid data and whether both contribute unique information. This study compared patients' and informants' reports of PDs in predicting outcome in a 7 1/2-year follow-up of 85 depressed outpatients. Patients and informants were independently evaluated using structured interviews; outcome was assessed using structured interviews with patients. Both patients' and informants' reports of PD diagnoses and dimensional scores independently predicted depression symptoms and global functioning at follow-up. However, only informants' reports made a unique contribution to predicting social adjustment. This finding indicates that both patients and informants provide unique information on Axis II psychopathology and argues for the use of both sources in the assessment of PDs.