Diagnosis of Comorbid Psychiatric Disorders in Substance Users Assessed With the Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders for DSM-IV

2006 ◽  
Vol 163 (4) ◽  
pp. 689-696 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Hasin ◽  
Sharon Samet ◽  
Edward Nunes ◽  
Jakob Meydan ◽  
Karen Matseoane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Substance Users ◽  
Comorbid Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Research Interview ◽  
Dsm Iv

scholarly journals Agreement between DSM-IV and DSM-5 measures of substance use disorders in a sample of adult substance users

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ofir Livne ◽  
Malka Stohl ◽  
Dvora Shmulewitz ◽  
Zachary Mannes ◽  
Deborah Hasin
Keyword(s):  
Substance Use ◽  
Substance Use Disorders ◽  
Substance Dependence ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Substance Users ◽  
Stimulant Use ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Similar Information ◽  
Research Interview ◽  
Dsm Iv

AbstractAimIn DSM-5, definitions of substance use disorders (SUD) were changed considerably from DSM-IV, yet little is known about how well DSM-IV and DSM-5 SUD diagnoses agree with each other within a series of individuals with substance use problems.MethodsPrevalences and chance-corrected agreement of DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV substance dependence were evaluated in 588 adult substance users, interviewed by clinician interviewers using the semi-structured Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders (PRISM-5). Alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, cocaine, heroin, opioid, sedative, and stimulant use disorders were examined. Cohen’s kappa was used to assess agreement between DSM-5 and DSM-IV SUD (including abuse or dependence), DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV dependence, and DSM-5 moderate-to-severe SUD and DSM-IV dependence.ResultsAgreement between DSM-5 and DSM-IV SUD was excellent for alcohol, cocaine, heroin, opioids, sedatives, and stimulants (κ=0.84; 0.91; 0.99; 0.96; 0.92; 0.97; respectively) and substantial for alcohol and tobacco (κ=0.75; 0.80, respectively). Agreement between DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV substance dependence was excellent for cocaine, heroin, opioids, sedatives, and stimulants (κ=0.89; 0.97; 0.90; 0.88; 0.94, respectively) and substantial for alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis (κ=0.75; 0.69; 0.63, respectively). Agreement between moderate and severe DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV dependence was excellent across all substances.ConclusionFindings suggest that while care should always be used in interpreting the results of studies using different methods, studies relying on DSM-IV or DSM-5 SUD diagnostic criteria can be considered to offer similar information and thus can be compared when accumulating a body of evidence on a particular issue regarding substance use.

Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders for DSM-IV

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Hasin ◽  
Sharon Samet ◽  
Edward Nunes ◽  
Jakob Meydan ◽  
Karen Matseoane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Research Interview ◽  
Dsm Iv

Whither Psychiatric Diagnosis

1999 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen J. Frances ◽  
Helen Link Egger
Keyword(s):  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Illness ◽  
Biological Effects ◽  
Genetic Research ◽  
Explanatory Models ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Current State ◽  
System Method ◽  
Dsm Iv

Objective: The aim of this paper is to describe the development of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV), its purposes and limitations, and the psychiatric nosologies which may emerge from advances in psychiatric research and which may supersede the current classification system. Method: A review of the methodology used to develop DSM-IV, considered in the context of current and future psychiatric, neurobiological, and genetic research, was undertaken. Results: The DSM-IV is a descriptive nosology that has shaped psychiatric research and clinical practice by providing agreed-upon definitions of psychiatric disorders based on the current state of empirical data. Despite the critical importance of the DSM system of classification, this complex yet limited nosology will eventually be replaced by simpler, more incisive explanatory models of psychiatric illness that reflect the interplay of biological, psychological, environmental and social variables affecting the expression and treatment of psychiatric disorders. Conclusions: As we continue to understand the pathophysiology of brain disorders, as well as the biological effects of psychiatric interventions, we will be able to move from a descriptive model to an integrative, explanatory model of psychiatric illness.

Feasibility of the Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders (PRISM) in an acute psychiatric ward

2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (02) ◽  
pp. 96-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valborg Helseth ◽  
Sharon Samet ◽  
Jon Johnsen ◽  
Jørgen G Bramness ◽  
Helge Waal
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Psychiatric Ward ◽  
Research Interview ◽  
Acute Psychiatric Ward

Validación de la versión española de la psychiatric research interview for substance and mental disorders (PRISM)

2001 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 293
Author(s):  
D. Serrano ◽  
G. Pérez ◽  
M. Astals ◽  
R. Martín-Santos ◽  
C. Castillo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Research Interview

Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental disorders (PRISM): Validation of the Spanish version

1999 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 337
Author(s):  
D. Serrano ◽  
G. Pérez ◽  
A. Ortells ◽  
R. Martin-Santos ◽  
C. Castillo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Spanish Version ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Research Interview

scholarly journals Prevalence and gender differences in psychiatric disorders and DSM-IV mental disorders: a population-based study

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1975-1985 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yousef Veisani ◽  
Ali Delpisheh ◽  
Fathola Mohamadian
Keyword(s):  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Roc Analysis ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
The Common

Background: The early diagnosis of psychiatric disorders is critical as it improves the chance of recovery for patients. The aim of this study was to determine gender disparities in psychiatric and mental disorders in adult persons and to examine the validity of the 28-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28; Persian version) in the diagnosis of patients with suspected psychiatric disorders, along with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Materials and Methods: The cross-sectional study was conducted using cluster random sampling method in three steps. Subjects were screened by GHQ-28 and then evaluated by Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) for diagnosis/classification of mental disorders. Chi-square test and independent t-test were used for statistical analysis. The ROC curve was used to assess cut-off points. Results: Of the 763 participants (aged 15 and above), 25.8% of responders demonstrated characteristics of psychological distress; the prevalence in males and females were 20.9% and 29.8%, respectively. The common mental disorders in males were anxiety disorder (18.2%), followed by any major depressive disorder (MDD) (17.4. %), and compulsive disorder (10.0%). In females, the common mental disorders were anxiety disorder (23.6%), followed by any MDD (22.7%), compulsive disorder (13.9%), phobia disorder (10.4%) and psychotic disorder (6.1%). ROC analysis showed that 91.7% of suspected persons had a mental disorder as assessed by DSM-IV-TR.  

Subtype differences in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) with regard to ADHD-symptoms, psychiatric comorbidity and psychosocial adjustment

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 142-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Sobanski ◽  
Daniel Brüggemann ◽  
Barbara Alm ◽  
Sebastian Kern ◽  
Alexandra Philipsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Psychosocial Adjustment ◽  
Psychiatric Comorbidity ◽  
Clinical Presentation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Adhd Symptoms ◽  
Comorbid Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Inattentive Type ◽  
Subtype Differences

AbstractBackgroundTo date, nearly all research of subtype differences in ADHD has been performed in children and only two studies, with conflicting results, have covered this subject in adults with ADHD.ObjectiveThis study examined subtype differences in the clinical presentation of ADHD-symptoms, related psychopathological features, psychosocial functioning and comorbid psychiatric disorders in adults with ADHD.MethodOne hundred and eighteen adults with ADHD, diagnosed according to DSM-IV criteria, and a population based control group underwent diagnostic evaluations with clinical interviews for ADHD, DSM-IV disorders and demographic features. Comparisons were made between ADHD combined type (n = 64), predominantly inattentive type (n = 30) and predominantly inattentive type, anamnestically combined type (n = 24), relative to each other and to a community control group (n = 70).ResultsThe four groups did not differ in age and gender composition. All ADHD groups had significantly less education, were significantly more often unemployed and reported significantly more lifetime psychiatric comorbidity than controls. In comparison to each other, the three ADHD groups differed mainly in core symptoms and the pattern of comorbid psychiatric disorders, whereas no prominent differences in associated psychopathological features and most of the assessed psychosocial functions could be found. Patients with ADHD combined type and inattentive, anamnestically combined type both presented with significantly more hyperactive symptoms and also showed more impulsive symptoms than those with the predominantly inattentive type. With a similar overall lifetime psychiatric comorbidity in the three groups, patients with ADHD combined type and inattentive, anamnestically combined type suffered significantly more from lifetime substance use disorders than patients with predominantly inattentive type.ConclusionOur results clearly show impaired psychosocial adjustment and elevated risk for additional psychiatric disorders in adults with all subtypes of ADHD, compared to healthy controls. They provide preliminary evidence that in adult ADHD there might be a subgroup of patients, which is classified as predominantly inattentive subtype according to current diagnostic criteria, but which in its clinical presentation is in between ADHD combined and inattentive type. Further studies are needed to evaluate this finding and to gain a clear picture of its validity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document