This article is the second report of a research project aimed towards providing evidence regarding the Trustworthiness of the 3-LM Model. Three groups of analysts from different IPA regions worked on the same clinical case using this model. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES: 1) to compare the 3LM forms with process-outcome measures, 2) to describe the presence and/or absence of the anchor points and 3) to exemplify the interrelation of the three levels of the model, in relation to the patient's change and interventions of the analyst. METHODOLOGY: Sample: verbatim transcript of three 3-LM groups. Materials: 3-LM Model forms, process and outcome measures (APS, DIS and PHI-RADIO) and Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis. Procedures: responding to each of the objectives. RESULTS: The first specific objective found a global convergence in the PHI, DIS and APS scores of the sessions. The second objective showed convergences and divergences between the regions in the themes of the anchor points. The third objective showed how an anchor point can become the focus of treatment and how it is presented in the analyst's interventions. DISCUSSION: The results preliminarily support the Trustworthiness of the 3-LM Model, needing new research to replicate and provide a more robust methodological support.