The nature of the pathway from conduct disorder (CD) in adolescence to antisocial behavior in adulthood has been debated and the role of certain mediators remains unclear. One perspective is that CD forms part of a general psychopathology dimension, playing a central role in the developmental trajectory. Impairment in reflective functioning (RF), i.e., the capacity to understand one's own and others' mental states, may relate to CD, psychopathology, and aggression. Here, we characterized the structure of psychopathology in adult male-offenders and its role, along with RF, in mediating the relationship between CD in their adolescence and current aggression.

A secondary analysis of pre-treatment data from 313 probation-supervised offenders was conducted, and measures of CD symptoms, general and specific psychopathology factors, RF, and aggression were evaluated through clinical interviews and questionnaires.

Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that a bifactor model best fitted the sample's psychopathology structure, including a general psychopathology factor (p factor) and five specific factors: internalizing, disinhibition, detachment, antagonism, and psychoticism. The structure of RF was fitted to the data using a one-factor model. According to our mediation model, CD significantly predicted the p factor, which was positively linked to RF impairments, resulting in increased aggression.

These findings highlight the critical role of a transdiagnostic approach provided by RF and general psychopathology in explaining the link between CD and aggression. Furthermore, they underscore the potential utility of treatments focusing on RF, such as mentalization-based treatment, in mitigating aggression in offenders with diverse psychopathologies.

National guidance cautions against low-intensity interventions for people with personality disorder, but evidence from trials is lacking.

To test the feasibility of conducting a randomised trial of a low-intensity intervention for people with personality disorder.

Single-blind, feasibility trial (trial registration: ISRCTN14994755). We recruited people aged 18 or over with a clinical diagnosis of personality disorder from mental health services, excluding those with a coexisting organic or psychotic mental disorder. We randomly allocated participants via a remote system on a 1:1 ratio to six to ten sessions of Structured Psychological Support (SPS) or to treatment as usual. We assessed social functioning, mental health, health-related quality of life, satisfaction with care and resource use and costs at baseline and 24 weeks after randomisation.

A total of 63 participants were randomly assigned to either SPS (n = 33) or treatment as usual (n = 30). Twenty-nine (88%) of those in the active arm of the trial received one or more session (median 7). Among 46 (73%) who were followed up at 24 weeks, social dysfunction was lower (−6.3, 95% CI −12.0 to −0.6, P = 0.03) and satisfaction with care was higher (6.5, 95% CI 2.5 to 10.4; P = 0.002) in those allocated to SPS. Statistically significant differences were not found in other outcomes. The cost of the intervention was low and total costs over 24 weeks were similar in both groups.

SPS may provide an effective low-intensity intervention for people with personality disorder and should be tested in fully powered clinical trials.

Social problem-solving therapy may be relevant in the treatment of personality disorder, although assessments of its effectiveness are uncommon.

To determine the effectiveness of a problem-solving intervention for adults with personality disorder in the community under conditions resembling routine clinical practice.

Participants were randomly allocated to brief psychoeducation plus 16 problem-solving group sessions (n=87) or to waiting-list control (n=89). Primary outcome was comparison of scores on the Social Problem Solving Inventory and the Social Functioning Questionnaire between intervention and control arms at the conclusion of treatment, on average at 24 weeks after randomisation.

In intention-to-treat analysis, those allocated to intervention showed significantly better problem-solving skills (P < 0.001), higher overall social functioning (P=0.031) and lower anger expression (P=0.039) compared with controls. No significant differences were found on use of services during the intervention period.

Problem-solving plus psychoeducation has potential as a preliminary intervention for adults with personality disorder.