Classification in psychiatry: the move towards ICD-11 and DSM-V

Cláudio E. M. Banzato

32 citations0/0 files storedCurrent Opinion in Psychiatry

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Mental Health and Psychiatry Psychology and Mental Health Personality Disorders and Psychopathology

Abstract

Purpose of review The intrinsic limitations of the current major diagnostic classifications have become increasingly apparent. Several constraints these diagnostic systems impose on clinical practice and research have led to a widespread perception that psychiatry must move beyond the nosologic model embodied in contemporary classifications. Thus, the present review covers the ongoing debate on key conceptual issues that may be relevant for the development of ICD-11 and DSM-V. Recent findings The concepts of validity and utility, as applied to diagnostic classifications, received closer attention recently and attempts were made to better define and contrast them. Against such background, issues like conciliating the multiple purposes of diagnosis, choosing taxonomic strategies and determining the boundaries between and within (subtypes and specifiers) diagnostic categories and thresholds can be properly examined. Recent findings from genetics and neuroscience have added complexity to the already intricate field of mental disorders, raising high hopes of breakthroughs in pathophysiology. This bet on pathophysiology inscribes itself in the perennial debate about the nature of mental disorders and their defining (fundamental) level, which of course has critical implications for the future of psychiatry. Summary Despite considerable scientific advances achieved recently, the challenges faced by psychiatry have only been increasing in complexity. In the present state of affairs, conceptual closure and reductionism possibly represent the most serious risks to be avoided. The review ends by suggesting that methodological pluralism is a necessary condition for building a better psychiatric nosology.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 32 citations exist upstream.

References

2003Prior Juvenile Diagnoses in Adults With Mental Disorder 2002Distinguishing Between the Validity and Utility of Psychiatric Diagnoses 2003Longitudinal Trajectories of Depression and Anxiety in a Prospective Community Study 2003Mild Disorders Should Not Be Eliminated From the DSM-V 2004Clinical Utility as a Criterion for Revising Psychiatric Diagnoses 2003Diagnostic Patterns in Latino, African American, and European American Psychiatric Patients 2003What Are the Right Targets for Psychopharmacology?2003Categorical Versus Dimensional Models of Mental Disorder: The Taxometric Evidence

Cited by

2012The crisis of psychiatry — insights and prospects from evolutionary theory 2008Chinese psychiatrists views on global features of CCMD-III, ICD-10 and DSM-IV

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.