scholarly journals The classification of psychiatric disorders according to DSM-5 deserves an internationally standardized psychological test battery on symptom level

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dalena van Heugten – van der Kloet ◽  
Ton van Heugten
Keyword(s):  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Test Battery ◽  
Psychological Test ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Symptom Level

Comparison of Alcohol Use Disorders in DSM and ICD

2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 143-153
Author(s):  
Jessica W. M. Wong ◽  
Friedrich M. Wurst ◽  
Ulrich W. Preuss
Keyword(s):  
Alcohol Use Disorders ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Clinical Use ◽  
Diagnostic Systems ◽  
Statistical Manual ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Historical Developments

Abstract. Introduction: With advances in medicine, our understanding of diseases has deepened and diagnostic criteria have evolved. Currently, the most frequently used diagnostic systems are the ICD (International Classification of Diseases) and the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) to diagnose alcohol-related disorders. Results: In this narrative review, we follow the historical developments in ICD and DSM with their corresponding milestones reflecting the scientific research and medical considerations of their time. The current diagnostic concepts of DSM-5 and ICD-11 and their development are presented. Lastly, we compare these two diagnostic systems and evaluate their practicability in clinical use.

Angststörungen – von der ICD-10 zur ICD-11

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Timo D. Vloet ◽  
Marcel Romanos
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Statistical Manual ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10

Zusammenfassung. Hintergrund: Nach 12 Jahren Entwicklung wird die 11. Version der International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) von der Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) im Januar 2022 in Kraft treten. Methodik: Im Rahmen eines selektiven Übersichtsartikels werden die Veränderungen im Hinblick auf die Klassifikation von Angststörungen von der ICD-10 zur ICD-11 zusammenfassend dargestellt. Ergebnis: Die diagnostischen Kriterien der generalisierten Angststörung, Agoraphobie und spezifischen Phobien werden angepasst. Die ICD-11 wird auf Basis einer Lebenszeitachse neu organisiert, sodass die kindesaltersspezifischen Kategorien der ICD-10 aufgelöst werden. Die Trennungsangststörung und der selektive Mutismus werden damit den „regulären“ Angststörungen zugeordnet und können zukünftig auch im Erwachsenenalter diagnostiziert werden. Neu ist ebenso, dass verschiedene Symptomdimensionen der Angst ohne kategoriale Diagnose verschlüsselt werden können. Diskussion: Die Veränderungen im Bereich der Angsterkrankungen umfassen verschiedene Aspekte und sind in der Gesamtschau nicht unerheblich. Positiv zu bewerten ist die Einführung einer Lebenszeitachse und Parallelisierung mit dem Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Schlussfolgerungen: Die entwicklungsbezogene Neuorganisation in der ICD-11 wird auch eine verstärkte längsschnittliche Betrachtung von Angststörungen in der Klinik sowie Forschung zur Folge haben. Damit rückt insbesondere die Präventionsforschung weiter in den Fokus.

The Usefulness of a Psychological Test Battery

1976 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 331-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Kuriansky ◽  
B. Gurland ◽  
D. Cowan
Keyword(s):  
Test Battery ◽  
Psychological Test

Diagnoses, Dimensions, and DSM-5

2010 ◽  
pp. 254-279
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Widiger ◽  
Maryanne Edmundson
Keyword(s):  
Substance Use ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Statistical Manual ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Dimensional Classification ◽  
Diagnosis And Classification

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition (DSM-III) is often said to have provided a significant paradigm shift in how psychopathology is diagnosed. The authors of DSM-5 have the empirical support and the opportunity to lead the field of psychiatry to a comparably bold new future in diagnosis and classification. The purpose of this chapter is to address the validity of the categorical and dimensional models for the classification and diagnosis of psychopathology. Considered in particular will be research concerning substance use disorders, mood disorders, and personality disorders. Limitations and concerns with respect to a dimensional classification of psychopathology are also considered. The chapter concludes with a recommendation for a conversion to a more quantitative, dimensional classification of psychopathology.

Shared genetic architecture across psychiatric disorders

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Andrew D. Grotzinger
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Genetic Correlations ◽  
Fine Grained ◽  
Level Data ◽  
Symptom Level ◽  
Genetic Level ◽  
Genetic Signal ◽  
Family Based ◽  
Shared Genetic

Abstract Psychiatric disorders overlap substantially at the genetic level, with family-based methods long pointing toward transdiagnostic risk pathways. Psychiatric genomics has progressed rapidly in the last decade, shedding light on the biological makeup of cross-disorder risk at multiple levels of analysis. Over a hundred genetic variants have been identified that affect multiple disorders, with many more to be uncovered as sample sizes continue to grow. Cross-disorder mechanistic studies build on these findings to cluster transdiagnostic variants into meaningful categories, including in what tissues or when in development these variants are expressed. At the upper-most level, methods have been developed to estimate the overall shared genetic signal across pairs of traits (i.e. single-nucleotide polymorphism-based genetic correlations) and subsequently model these relationships to identify overarching, genomic risk factors. These factors can subsequently be associated with external traits (e.g. functional imaging phenotypes) to begin to understand the makeup of these transdiagnostic risk factors. As psychiatric genomic efforts continue to expand, we can begin to gain even greater insight by including more fine-grained phenotypes (i.e. symptom-level data) and explicitly considering the environment. The culmination of these efforts will help to inform bottom-up revisions of our current nosology.

scholarly journals Re-evaluating DSM-I

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 449-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Cooper ◽  
R. K. Blashfield
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
World War ◽  
Statistical Manual ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Mental Diseases ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
The Military

The DSM-I is currently viewed as a psychoanalytic classification, and therefore unimportant. There are four reasons to challenge the belief that DSM-I was a psychoanalytic system. First, psychoanalysts were a minority on the committee that created DSM-I. Second, psychoanalysts of the time did not use DSM-I. Third, DSM-I was as infused with Kraepelinian concepts as it was with psychoanalytic concepts. Fourth, contemporary writers who commented on DSM-I did not perceive it as psychoanalytic. The first edition of the DSM arose from a blending of concepts from the Statistical Manual for the Use of Hospitals of Mental Diseases, the military psychiatric classifications developed during World War II, and the International Classification of Diseases (6th edition). As a consensual, clinically oriented classification, DSM-I was popular, leading to 20 printings and international recognition. From the perspective inherent in this paper, the continuities between classifications from the first half of the 20th century and the systems developed in the second half (e.g. DSM-III to DSM-5) become more visible.

Psychotic disorders in DSM-5 and ICD-11

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 349-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Falko Biedermann ◽  
W. Wolfgang Fleischhacker
Keyword(s):  
Psychotic Disorders ◽  
Work Group ◽  
Theoretical Background ◽  
Classification Systems ◽  
World Health ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Diagnostic Criterion

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) was published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in 2013, and the Work Group on the Classification of Psychotic disorders (WGPD), installed by the World Health Organization (WHO), is expected to publish the new chapter about schizophrenia and other primary psychotic disorders in 2017. We reviewed the available literature to summarize the major changes, innovations, and developments of both manuals. If available and possible, we outline the theoretical background behind these changes. Due to the fact that the development of ICD-11 has not yet been completed, the details about ICD-11 are still proposals under ongoing revision. In this ongoing process, they may be revised and therefore have to be seen as proposals. DSM-5 has eliminated schizophrenia subtypes and replaced them with a dimensional approach based on symptom assessments. ICD-11 will most likely go in a similar direction, as both manuals are planned to be more harmonized, although some differences will remain in details and the conceptual orientation. Next to these modifications, ICD-11 will provide a transsectional diagnostic criterion for schizoaffective disorders and a reorganization of acute and transient psychotic and delusional disorders. In this manuscript, we will compare the 2 classification systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document