DSM-5 reviewed from different angles

• Verfasst von: Möller, Hans-Jürgen [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Herpertz, Sabine [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: DSM-5 reviewed from different angles
• Titelzusatz: goal attainment, rationality, use of evidence, consequences : part 1: general aspects and paradigmatic discussion of depressive disorders
• Verf.angabe: Hans-Jürgen Möller, Borwin Bandelow, Michael Bauer, Harald Hampel, Sabine C. Herpertz, Michael Soyka, Utako B. Barnikol, Simone Lista, Emanuel Severus, Wolfgang Maier
• Jahr: 2015
• Jahr des Originals: 2014
• Umfang: 14 S.
• Fussnoten: Published online: 14 August 2014 ; Gesehen am 12.06.2020
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience
• Ort Quelle: Darmstadt : Steinkopff, 1868
• Jahr Quelle: 2015
• Band/Heft Quelle: 265(2015), 1, Seite 5-18
• ISSN Quelle: 1433-8491
• DOI: doi:10.1007/s00406-014-0520-x
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• K10plus-PPN: 1700521268

Abstract

DSM-5 was published in 2013 after about 10 years of preparation. Part 1 of this paper discusses several more general aspects of DSM-5 and offers a detailed, paradigmatic analysis of changes made to the chapter on depressive disorders. The background for the changes is analysed on the basis of a PubMed search and review papers on the classification of mental disorders in general and on empirical knowledge about individual disorders. Contrary to the original plans, DSM-5 has not introduced a primarily dimensional diagnostic system but has widely preserved the categorical system of disorders. Also, it has not adopted a more neurobiological approach to disorders by including biological markers to increase the objectivity of psychiatric diagnoses but has maintained the primarily symptom-based, descriptive approach. The criteria for some disorders have been changed, including affective, schizophrenic and addiction disorders, and a few new disorders have been added. A minimal version of the dimensional approach was realised through the introduction of several transnosological specifiers and the option to make symptom- or syndrome-related severity and dimensional assessments. These specifiers and assessments might allow a more individualised description of a patient’s psychopathological state and more personalised treatment. However, most of the symptom- and syndrome-related assessments are not mandatory and therefore may not be used in clinical practice.