Mental Health Professionals' Natural Taxonomies of Mental Disorders: Implications for the Clinical Utility of the ICD-11 and the DSM-5.
Saved in:
| Title: | Mental Health Professionals' Natural Taxonomies of Mental Disorders: Implications for the Clinical Utility of the ICD-11 and the DSM-5. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Reed, Geoffrey M., Roberts, Michael C., Keeley, Jared, Hooppell, Catherine, Matsumoto, Chihiro, Sharan, Pratap, Robles, Rebeca, Carvalho, Hudson, Wu, Chunyan, Gureje, Oye, Leal‐Leturia, Itzear, Flanagan, Elizabeth H., Correia, João Mendonça, Maruta, Toshimasa, Ayuso‐Mateos, José Luís, Jesus Mari, Jair, Xiao, Zeping, Evans, Spencer C., Saxena, Shekhar, Medina‐Mora, María Elena |
| Source: | Journal of Clinical Psychology. Dec2013, Vol. 69 Issue 12, p1191-1212. 22p. 1 Diagram, 5 Charts. |
| Subjects: | Classification of mental disorders, Clinical psychologists, Clinical psychology, Psychiatrists, Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Book), Cross-cultural psychiatry, Low-income countries, Middle-income countries |
| Abstract: | Objective To examine the conceptualizations held by psychiatrists and psychologists around the world of the relationships among mental disorders in order to inform decisions about the structure of the classification of mental and behavioral disorders in World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 11th Revision (ICD-11). Method 517 mental health professionals in 8 countries sorted 60 cards containing the names of mental disorders into groups of similar disorders, and then formed a hierarchical structure by aggregating and disaggregating these groupings. Distance matrices were created from the sorting data and used in cluster and correlation analyses. Results Clinicians' taxonomies were rational, interpretable, and extremely stable across countries, diagnostic system used, and profession. Clinicians' consensus classification structure was different from ICD-10 and the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th Edition (DSM-IV), but in many respects consistent with ICD-11 proposals. Conclusions The clinical utility of the ICD-11 may be improved by making its structure more compatible with the common conceptual organization of mental disorders observed across diverse global clinicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Clinical Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Objective To examine the conceptualizations held by psychiatrists and psychologists around the world of the relationships among mental disorders in order to inform decisions about the structure of the classification of mental and behavioral disorders in World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 11th Revision (ICD-11). Method 517 mental health professionals in 8 countries sorted 60 cards containing the names of mental disorders into groups of similar disorders, and then formed a hierarchical structure by aggregating and disaggregating these groupings. Distance matrices were created from the sorting data and used in cluster and correlation analyses. Results Clinicians' taxonomies were rational, interpretable, and extremely stable across countries, diagnostic system used, and profession. Clinicians' consensus classification structure was different from ICD-10 and the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th Edition (DSM-IV), but in many respects consistent with ICD-11 proposals. Conclusions The clinical utility of the ICD-11 may be improved by making its structure more compatible with the common conceptual organization of mental disorders observed across diverse global clinicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00219762 |
| DOI: | 10.1002/jclp.22031 |
