Overlapping And Differentiating Clinical Features of Autism and Borderline Personality Disorder in Women and People Assigned Female at Birth: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Kirsten Barnicot, Elissa Thompson, Sally Turner and 4 others
PMID 41928549WHAT IT FOUND
Autistic women and people assigned female at birth scored higher on sensory and social differences, sameness and camouflaging.
Those meeting BPD criteria scored higher on identity disturbance, distress when alone and impulsivity. Difficulty identifying emotions was the one thing both groups shared.
Key findings
01Sensory processing differences, social cognition difficulties, preference for sameness, repetitive motor behaviour, social camouflaging, differences in social awareness and social communication, need for time alone and low social motivation were more characteristic of autistic participants than of those meeting BPD criteria. The paper lists them in order of the size of the gap, with sensory processing differences largest.
02Identity disturbance, intolerable distress and difficulty coping when alone, and rejection sensitivity were more characteristic of participants meeting BPD criteria, and so were emotional reactivity and emotion dysregulation, which the researchers had expected to be similar in the two groups. Identity disturbance was the single biggest difference between the groups.
03Difficulty being clear about emotions was the only measured feature that did not separate the two groups; both scored about the same. This goes against the clinical view that people with a BPD diagnosis identify their emotions less well than autistic people.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Whether someone was autistic or met criteria for BPD was decided from what participants reported about themselves and from screening questionnaires, not from diagnostic interviews. The authors say interviews would have been more robust. People who looked likely to meet criteria for both conditions were screened out, so these two groups are cleaner than most clinic populations. If those screened out did not in fact have the other diagnosis, screening also made the groups more different from each other than they really are. 102 people took part, most of them educated to degree level or above and most of them White British, so the findings may not carry over to other groups. Most participants were also already diagnosed and under care for one condition only. The combination of questionnaires that sorted 95% of participants into the right group was built and tested on the same 102 people. It has not been tried on a fresh group, so that figure is likely to be better than it would be in practice. No one checked whether the questionnaires are usable by autistic people, where ambiguous, imprecise or metaphorical wording can cause problems. The comparisons with general population scores come from other studies with different samples and designs, and the authors describe those comparisons as tentative. Some possible differences were not measured at all: intense interests and differences in non-verbal communication for autism; emptiness, idealisation and devaluation, and dissociation for BPD.
Declared interests
Funded by a grant from Words That Carry On through the McPin Foundation. The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was co-led by an autistic researcher with experience of a BPD diagnosis, co-designed with another autistic researcher and advised by lived-experience and clinician panels, and the authors state a neurodiversity-affirming approach to autistic traits and a critical stance on the BPD diagnostic construct.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the 95% correct classification as a diagnostic test you can run in clinic. That combination of questionnaires was built from the same 102 people it was tested on, everyone's diagnosis and every questionnaire answer was self-reported, and the study deliberately left out people who looked likely to meet criteria for both conditions. The paper's own comparison with general population samples suggests many of these traits are present to some degree in both groups, so what separates them is how severe and how widespread the difficulties are, not whether they are there at all.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →