patients and in its informant-report form by those who know the patient well (e.g., a
spouse). A detailed clinical assessment would involve collect ion of both patient- and in-
formant-report data on all 25 facets of the pe rsonality trait model. However, if this is not
possible, due to time or other co nstraints, assessment focused at the five-domain level is an
acceptable clinical option when only a general (vs. detailed) portrait of a patient’s person-
ality is needed (see Criterion B of PD-TS). Ho wever, if personality- based problems are the
focus of treatment, then it will be important to assess individual s’ trait facets as well as do-
mains.
Because personality traits are continuously distributed in the population, an approach
to making the judgment that a specific trait is elevated (and therefor e is present for diag-
nostic purposes) could involve comparing indi viduals’ personality tr ait levels with pop-
ulation norms and/or clinical judgment. If a trait is elevated—that is, formal psychometric
testing and/or interview data support the clinical judgment of elevation—then it is con-
sidered as contributing to meeting Criterion B of Section III personality disorders.
Clinical Utility of the Multidimensional Personality 
Functioning a nd Trait Model
Disorder and trait constructs each add value to the other in  predicting important anteced-
ent (e.g., family history, hist ory of child abuse), concurrent (e.g., functional impairment,
medication use), and predictive (e.g., hospit alization, suicide attempts) variables. DSM-5
impairments in personality functioning and pa thological personality traits each contrib-
ute independently to clinical decisions about degree of disability; risks for self-harm, vio-