{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03372681281618887, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011804384485666104, 'mean_word_length': 5.416216216216216, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 1, '<': 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}}
Commentary on Krueger and Eaton's "Personality traits and the classification of mental disorders: toward a more complete integration in DSM-5 and an empirical model of psychopathology": real-world considerations in implementing an empirically based dimensional model of personality in DSM-5.

In their article, Krueger and Eaton (pp. 97-118, this issue) advocate for a "more complete and extensive integration of personality traits in future DSMs [Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals of Mental Disorders], via the explicit inclusion of an empirically based, dimensional personality trait model" (p. 97) and review the "diverse ways in which the inclusion of an empirically based personality trait model could constitute a critical innovation in the transition from DSM-IV to DSM-5" (p. 113). Krueger and Eaton's proposal that (DSM-5) adopt a dimensional personality trait approach exemplifies the difficulties of devising a classification scheme that satisfies the needs of the both the clinical and research communities. In this instance, the challenge is adapting a complex dimensional trait scheme developed and utilized almost exclusively by the research community, for clinical use.