Relational processes in the DSM-V revision process: Comment on the special section.

2006 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 356-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael B. First
2010 ◽  
Vol 197 (4) ◽  
pp. 263-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth S. Kendler ◽  
Michael B. First

SummaryTwo major approaches can be used for the up-coming revisions of DSM–V and ICD–10: an ‘iterative model’ in which incremental changes are made or a ‘paradigm shift model’ in which the existing approach is jettisoned in favour of a new nosological model. We explore each of these two approaches and conclude that although they both have strengths and limitations, our field is not currently ready for a paradigm shift.


Author(s):  
Steven R.H. Beach ◽  
Heather M. Foran ◽  
Richard E. Heyman ◽  
Amy M. Smith Slep ◽  
Anthony R. Cordaro ◽  
...  

Efforts to expand and update the description of relational processes in theDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM) to enhance its clinical utility began with DSM-IV, but met with limited success. The current effort to revise the description of relational problems has focused on both the DSM-V and theInternational Classification of Diseases(ICD)-11, with an emphasis on (1) documenting a solid empirical foundation for inclusion of relational processes in these diagnostic systems and (2) creating categories and symptom sets that reflect that empirical foundation. In this chapter we describe the process that led to the current revisions, along with steps that were taken to ensure broad consensus and relevance for a range of countries and cultures. We also briefly recap several arguments for continued attention to relational processes as well as additional changes that might be considered in future revisions. Finally, we also briefly discuss the issue of whether some relational processes are better thought of as categories in addition to being dimensions. Scientific aspects of the project have been very productive. However, revision of relational problem descriptions in DSM-V was limited and final revisions to the ICD-11 are still underway.


2009 ◽  
Vol 195 (5) ◽  
pp. 379-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Assen Jablensky

SummaryIn the revision process leading up to DSM–V and ICD–11, it is important to highlight both similarities and differences between the two classifications. Where irreconcilable conceptual differences are involved, these should be stated in a manner inviting future research to elucidate the advantages and disadvantages of alternative concepts or definitions. Eventually, both DSM–V and ICD–11 will need to be assessed against a set of benchmarks of validity and utility.


2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
Robert D. Rondinelli ◽  
Elizabeth Genovese ◽  
Craig Uejo ◽  
Marjorie Eskay-Auerbach

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, was published in December 2007 and is the result of efforts to enhance the relevance of impairment ratings, improve internal consistency, promote precision, and simplify the rating process. The revision process was designed to address shortcomings and issues in previous editions and featured an open, well-defined, and tiered peer review process. The principles underlying the AMA Guides have not changed, but the sixth edition uses a modified conceptual framework based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF), a comprehensive model of disablement developed by the World Health Organization. The ICF classifies domains that describe body functions and structures, activities, and participation; because an individual's functioning and disability occur in a context, the ICF includes a list of environmental factors to consider. The ICF classification uses five impairment classes that, in the sixth edition, were developed into diagnosis-based grids for each organ system. The grids use commonly accepted consensus-based criteria to classify most diagnoses into five classes of impairment severity (normal to very severe). A figure presents the structure of a typical diagnosis-based grid, which includes ranges of impairment ratings and greater clarity about choosing a discreet numerical value that reflects the impairment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document