Organizing the Work in German-speaking Countries: The ICD10-questionnaire in 2008

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (S1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
J. Zielasek
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
Classification Criteria ◽  
World Health ◽  
Perceived Need ◽  
National Differences ◽  
German Speaking ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Language Areas

In the revision of the International Classification of Mental Disorders (currently 10th revision, hence ICD-10), an international scientific partnership network group was founded by the World Health Organisation (Chair: N. Sartorius, Geneva) in order to review the international scientific evidence of putative significance for the revision of ICD-10 in different language areas. The group of German-speaking countries was founded during the annual congress of the German Society of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Nervous Diseases in 2007. The core group consists of representatives from Austria, Germany, Switzerland and representatives of other German-speaking countries.A major task of the German-speaking group was to design and test an international survey questionnaire addressing the perceived need for changes to the classification criteria in ICD-10 for mental disorders, the scientific rationale for such proposals, and a general assessment of the foodnes of fit with which the current classification criteria represent the respective mental disorders. The survey was started in August 2008 and results will be presented in this symposium.The results of and experiences with this questionnaire are expected to influence the questionnaires to be distributed in other language areas, allowing for regional or national differences to be reflected, but also allowing a comparison with previous editions used when ICD-10 was developed. Taken together, the questionnaire is expected to yield insights into the perceived need to adjust ICD-11 to comply with new scientific evidence, but also with practical clinical experiences with its predecessors.

The perspective of German-speaking Countries for the Future work to Develop ICD-11

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (S1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
W. Gaebel
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
World Health ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
German Speaking ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Partnership Network ◽  
Future Work

In the course of the revision of the International Classification of Mental Disorders (currently 10th revision, hence ICD-10), an international scientific partnership network group was founded by the World Health Organisation (Chair: N. Sartorius, Geneva) in order to review the international scientific evidence of putative significance for the revision of ICD-10 in different language areas.In the course of this project we reviewed several areas of activity that may be of importance for the review process to develop ICD-11. First of all, general questions arise about how a psychiatric classification system should be organized. Will it still depend on classical psychopathological information with additional information from imaging, genetic and laboratory studies, and finally the patient history? An alternative approach is based on functional psychopathology be based on functional neural modules which represent functional activities of the human brain and their disturbances in mental disorders. Another area of debate is whether dimensions rather than categories shall lay a new foundation for the classification of mental disorders. A further issue arises when considering narrative elements of psychiatric history taking. In how far can or should such factors be integrated? All these questions are interwoven with the classical German contributions to psychiatric nosology by Kraepelin and Bleuler, which will be reassessed on the background of these current topics in revising ICD-10.

Assessing the opinions and experiences of German-speaking psychiatrists regarding necessary changes for the 11th revision of the mental disorders chapter of the international classification of disorders (ICD-11)

2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (8) ◽  
pp. 437-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Zielasek ◽  
H.J. Freyberger ◽  
M. Jänner ◽  
H.P. Kapfhammer ◽  
N. Sartorius ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Attention Deficit Disorder ◽  
Goodness Of Fit ◽  
Diagnostic Category ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Diagnostic Categories ◽  
German Speaking ◽  
Icd 10

AbstractWe performed an Internet-based questionnaire survey of the opinions of German-speaking psychiatrists regarding the experiences with the 10th revision of the international classification of mental disorders (chapter F of ICD-10). We received 304 completed questionnaires including more than 500 free-text comments. The responding group was characterized by professionally experienced middle-aged psychiatrists. German-speaking psychiatrists were comparatively content with ICD-10. Most diagnostic categories received a “satisfied” or “very satisfied” rating by the majority of respondents. Negative “goodness of fit” ratings – a possible indicator of the need for revision – were not higher than 50% for any category. Based on free-text entries, neurasthenia was the single diagnostic category most often suggested for deletion in ICD-11. Changes were considered necessary mainly for dementias and personality disorders. Adult attention deficit disorder and narcissistic personality disorder were the two diagnostic categories most frequently suggested to be added as new categories. This study provides valuable information related to perceived clinical utility of the classification, though with a narrow sample. Information about clinicians’ experiences should be combined with scientific evidence for the revision process of ICD-11.

scholarly journals Impact of the ICD–10 Primary Health Care (PHC) diagnostic and management guidelines for mental disorders on detection and outcome in primary care

2003 ◽  
Vol 182 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Croudace ◽  
Jonathan Evans ◽  
Glynn Harrison ◽  
Deborah J. Sharp ◽  
Ellen Wilkinson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Primary Health Care ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
World Health ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Primary Health ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Health Organization

BackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) ICD–10 Primary Health Care (PHC) Guidelines for Diagnosis and Management of Mental Disorders (1996) have not been evaluated in a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT).AimsTo evaluate the effect of local adaptation and dissemination of the guidelines.MethodPragmatic, pair-matched, cluster RCT involving 30 practices.ResultsGuideline practices were less sensitive but more specific in identifying morbidity, but these differences were not significant. Guideline patients did not differ from usual-care patients on 12-item General Health Questionnaire scores at 3-month follow-up or in the proportion who were still cases. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes.ConclusionsAttempts to influence clinician behaviour through a process of adaptation and extension of guidelines are unlikely to change detection rates or outcomes.

scholarly journals Orthodoxy, illusio, and playing the scientific game: a Bourdieusian analysis of infection control science in the COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 126
Author(s):  
Trisha Greenhalgh ◽  
Mustafa Ozbilgin ◽  
Damien Contandriopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Infection Control ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
World Health ◽  
Airborne Transmission ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
Evidence Quality ◽  
Vested Interests ◽  
Scientific Capital

Background: Scientific and policy bodies’ failure to acknowledge and act on the evidence base for airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in a timely way is both a mystery and a scandal. In this study, we applied theories from Bourdieu to address the question, “How was a partial and partisan scientific account of SARS-CoV-2 transmission constructed and maintained, leading to widespread imposition of infection control policies which de-emphasised airborne transmission?”. Methods: From one international case study (the World Health Organisation) and four national ones (UK, Canada, USA and Japan), we selected a purposive sample of publicly available texts including scientific evidence summaries, guidelines, policy documents, public announcements, and social media postings. To analyse these, we applied Bourdieusian concepts of field, doxa, scientific capital, illusio, and game-playing. We explored in particular the links between scientific capital, vested interests, and policy influence. Results: Three fields—political, state (policy and regulatory), and scientific—were particularly relevant to our analysis. Political and policy actors at international, national, and regional level aligned—predominantly though not invariably—with medical scientific orthodoxy which promoted the droplet theory of transmission and considered aerosol transmission unproven or of doubtful relevance. This dominant scientific sub-field centred around the clinical discipline of infectious disease control, in which leading actors were hospital clinicians aligned with the evidence-based medicine movement. Aerosol scientists—typically, chemists, and engineers—representing the heterodoxy were systematically excluded from key decision-making networks and committees. Dominant discourses defined these scientists’ ideas and methodologies as weak, their empirical findings as untrustworthy or insignificant, and their contributions to debate as unhelpful. Conclusion: The hegemonic grip of medical infection control discourse remains strong. Exit from the pandemic depends on science and policy finding a way to renegotiate what Bourdieu called the ‘rules of the scientific game’—what counts as evidence, quality, and rigour.

ICD-11: Example of Psychotic Disorders

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. S31-S31
Author(s):  
W. Gaebel
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Psychotic Disorders ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Classification Criteria ◽  
World Health ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Diagnostic Reliability ◽  
Deutschland Gmbh ◽  
Health Organization

The revision of the current classification criteria for disorders issued by the World Health Organization (WHO) (International Classification of Disorders, ICD-10) is underway and will also include a revision of the classification criteria of the mental and behavioural disorders. Working groups for specific groups of mental disorders had produced suggestions for revised diagnostic criteria and included a working group on schizophrenia and other primary psychotic disorders. This presentation will focus on this group of mental disorders. Major changes suggested were an introduction of symptom and course specifiers, the inclusion of cognitive symptoms and a de-emphasising of the so-called first rank symptoms of schizophrenia, a cross-sectional approach towards the classification of schizoaffective disorder and a reorganization of the acute psychotic disorders. Initial internet-based field trials showed some incremental improvements of diagnostic reliability, but more crucial for an adjustment of the revised classification criteria will be the expected results of the upcoming clinic-based field trials.Disclosure of interestUnterstützung bei Symposien/Symposia Support.– Janssen-Cilag GmbH, Neuss– Aristo Pharma GmbH, Berlin– Lilly Deutschland GmbH, Bad Homburg– Servier Deutschland GmbH, München– Fakultätsmitglied/Faculty Member– Lundbeck International Neuroscience Foundation (LINF), Dänemark

scholarly journals Professionalism and Evidence-Based Mental Health Care: The Roadblocks and New Ways

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 33
Author(s):  
Oyeyemi Olajumoke Oyelade ◽  
Agathe Uwintonze ◽  
Munirat Olayinka Adebiyi
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Mental Health Care ◽  
Nursing Care ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
World Health ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Care

BACKGROUND: Knowledge acquisition and knowledge update through research remains an important factor to ensure quality and cost-effective care, which is the hallmark of professionalism and evidence-based care. Knowledge is vital in nursing due to the centrality of nursing to health care. More importantly is mental health because mental health is primary to general health, just as nursing is the heartbeat of health care. This makes the issue of mental health care, a necessary service that cannot be overemphasised. The World Health Organisation declares mental health as the essential form of health that needs to be acquired without which all others form of health may not be achieved. Further to this, the global emphasis on care and recovery of lost mental health is on the increase. This, therefore, makes evidence-based mental health care, a necessity and not a choice. AIM: To discuss evidence-based nursing, the benefits, challenges and opportunities. METHODOLOGY: This article adopts the traditional review method to assess the concept of discussion on mental health care, evidence-based practice and professionalism. FINDINGS: The term evidence-based care Is gaining recognition in a variety of professions and organisations. The use of evidence in nursing care is influenced by policies, knowledge of time management, availability of human resources, practice autonomy and attitude of professionals. However, the use of evidence-based practice is not debatable. CONCLUSION: The use of scientific evidence for validating nursing care is germane. This article exposed the barriers to evidence-based mental health nursing and the way forward. 

Australasian Field Trials of the Mental and Behavioural Disorders Section of the Draft ICD-10

1990 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 313-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter M. Ellis ◽  
Garry Welch ◽  
Gordon L. Purdie ◽  
Graham W. Mellsop
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic System ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
World Health ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Western Pacific Region ◽  
Behavioural Disorders ◽  
The World ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
The Western Pacific

Field trials of the “Mental and Behavioural Disorders” section of the 1987 draft of the ICD-10 have been co-ordinated for the World Health Organisation by a number of regional centres. The design of the field trials and the major features of ICD-10 are briefly discussed. The results of the field trials in the Western Pacific region are described, and compared with the results of the original DSM-Ill field trials. ICD-10 appears to be an acceptably reliable diagnostic system, and the ratings of its feasibility and utility by participating clinicians suggest that it will be seen as a distinct advance over ICD-9.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document