By David J. Kupfer, Visit Amazon's Michael B. First Page, search results, Learn about Author Central, Michael B. First, , Darrel A. Regier

This booklet is made from six "white papers" which characterize the preliminary part of the DSM-V making plans technique. those "white papers" additionally function a foundation for learn and dialogue in coaching for DSM-V. less than collaboration among the yankee Psychiatric organization and the nationwide Institute of psychological wellbeing and fitness, the publication attempts to supply path and power incentives for the improvement of destiny clinical classifications.

Show description

Read or Download A Research Agenda for DSM-V PDF

Similar clinical psychology books

A Constructionist Clinical Psychology for Cognitive Behaviour Therapy

Such a lot scientific psychologists and cognitive behaviour therapists undertake a standpoint which assumes client's misery arises from misguided perceptions of the exterior international and that those perceptions are as a result of the frustrating filtering of knowledge concerning the exterior international via inner perceptual biases and schemas.

Treatment Plans and Interventions for Depression and Anxiety Disorders

This frequent publication is jam-packed with necessary instruments for treating the most typical medical difficulties encountered in outpatient psychological wellbeing and fitness perform. Chapters offer simple details on melancholy and the six significant nervousness problems; step by step directions for evidence-based evaluation and intervention; illustrative case examples; and useful tips for writing stories and working with third-party payers.

Additional resources for A Research Agenda for DSM-V

Sample text

The research agendas suggested here pertaining to ICD/ DSM differences, cross-cultural applicability, and application in nonpsychiatric settings must have value independent of their pertinence to suggested revisions to be included in DSM-V. In fact, we propose a highly 26 A RESEARCH AGENDA FOR DSM-V conservative approach to the revision process and suggest that changes be made only when the empirical evidence or the need for change is compelling. Although much of the research proposed here may not produce definitive results in time for inclusion in DSM-V, the development of definitions of syndromes and criteria with universal applicability has implications that should affect future editions of the manual.

There is a plausible argument that the fundamental reason why medicine has never succeeded in providing a satisfactory definition of disease is that it has always been primarily concerned with the identification and treatment of individual diseases, and these are very heterogeneous because they have been identified at various stages over the last 400 years with defining characteristics of quite varied kinds. Some, like migraine and torticollis, are still defined by their clinical syndromes; others, such as mitral stenosis, by their morbid anatomy; tumors of all kinds by their histopathology; most infections by the identity of the causative organism; porphyria by its biochemistry; Down syndrome by its chromosomal architecture; the thalassemias by abnormal molecular structures; and so on.

1985; Kendler et al. 1994, 1995). This lack of congruence of results expected from various validators poses a profound problem for the nosologic process. It means that a hierarchy of validators must first be chosen for a given nosologic question. Unfortunately, this choice is fundamentally a value judgment and cannot be directly addressed by empirical inquiries (Kendler 1990). ” This is not a scientific question. At the second stage, once the critical validators are agreed on, only then can the process of formulating maximally valid criteria sets occur.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.26 of 5 – based on 31 votes