Evidence Hub

Protocol for a cohort comparison treatment study evaluating the efficacy of a dimensional adaptation of GPM (GPM-extended) compared to a classic outpatient GPM treatment for patient fulfilling criteria for BPD: the EPSYLIA project

M. Blay, I. Benmakhlouf, M. Zenou, M. Amate, Arjin Uludag-Martin, François Chevrier, M. Pomey, Marie Brisebarre et al.

Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2026

Abstract

Personality disorders (PD) are common and debilitating psychiatric conditions, often characterized by severe interpersonal and self-dysfunction. Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is the most studied PD, with treatments like Good Psychiatric Management (GPM) demonstrating effectiveness. To address the current state of the personality disorder field, where most evidence-based treatments have been developed using a categorical approach, while the most empirically supported approach is the dimensional one, we developed an adaptation of GPM (GPM-extended) integrating concepts of dimensional personality dysfunction into an established therapeutic framework. This prospective “here-there” study will compare GPM-extended with standard GPM in two outpatient facilities. This methodological choice is due to organizational and institutional limitations. Participants (≥18 years) meeting BPD criteria per the SCID-II will be included. The GPM-extended group incorporates a dimensional diagnostic framework focusing on three personality dilemmas (rejection/abandonment fears, self-esteem dysregulation, and perfection/control issues), with tailored psychoeducation and treatment priorities. The standard GPM group will follow the validated GPM protocol, emphasizing interpersonal hypersensitivity and standard psychoeducation. Both groups will receive weekly individual therapy and group interventions for one year. Between-group differences at 1-year follow-up will be assessed using multiple…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free