首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Psychiatry Investigation >Diagnostic Issues of Depressive Disorders from Kraepelinian Dualism to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition
【2h】

Diagnostic Issues of Depressive Disorders from Kraepelinian Dualism to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition

机译:从Kraepelinian二元论到精神障碍诊断和统计手册第五版的抑郁症的诊断问题

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Because the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV) was mainly influenced by the neo-Kraepelinian approach, its categorical approach to defining mental disorders has been criticized from the viewpoint of etiological neutrality. In the context of bridging the gap between “presumed etiologies-based symptomatology” and “identifiable pathophysiological etiologies,” the content in 5th edition, the DSM-5, has been revised to incorporate a combination of categorical and dimensional approaches. The most remarkable change of note regarding the diagnostic classification of depressive disorders in the DSM-5 is the splitting of mood disorders into bipolar disorders and depressive disorders, which is in accordance with the deconstruction of the Kraepelinian dualism for psychoses. The transdiagnostic specifiers “with mixed features,” “with psychotic features,” and “with anxious distress” are introduced to describe the relationships of depressive disorders with bipolar disorders, schizophrenia, and generalized anxiety disorder, respectively, in a dimensional manner. The lowering of the diagnostic threshold for major depressive disorder (MDD) may be caused by the addition of “hopelessness” to the subjective descriptors of depressive mood and the elimination of “bereavement exclusion” from the definition of MDD. Since the heterogeneity of MDD is equivalent to the Wittgensteinian “games” analogy, the different types of MDD are related not by a single essential feature but rather by “family resemblance.” Network analyses of MDD symptoms may therefore need further review to elucidate the connections among interrelated symptoms and other clinical elements.
机译:由于《精神疾病诊断和统计手册》第4版(DSM-IV)主要受新克莱佩林主义方法的影响,因此从病因中立的角度对它的分类方法进行了批评。为了弥合“基于病因的症状学”和“可识别的病理生理学病因”之间的差距,第5版中的内容DSM-5已进行了修订,以结合分类方法和维度方法。关于DSM-5中抑郁症的诊断分类,最值得注意的变化是将情绪障碍分为躁郁症和抑郁症,这与Kraepelinian对精神病的二元论的解构相一致。介绍了具有“混合特征”,“具有精神病特征”和“具有焦虑困扰”的转诊说明词,以维度方式分别描述了抑郁症与躁郁症,精神分裂症和广泛性焦虑症的关系。重度抑郁症(MDD)的诊断阈值降低可能是由于在抑郁情绪的主观描述语中添加了“绝望”和消除了MDD定义中的“丧行排除”。由于MDD的异质性相当于维特根斯坦的“游戏”类推,因此MDD的不同类型不是通过单一的基本特征而是通过“家庭相似性”来关联。因此,可能需要对MDD症状进行网络分析,以进一步阐明相关症状与其他临床要素之间的联系。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号