Advantages Of The Dsm-5 Classification System

The DSM IV-TR, published by the American Psychiatric Association, is the authoritative book for clinicians, psychiatrists, therapists and other healthcare professionals who diagnose mental disorders. It lists the diagnostic criteria and features, differential diagnoses, course and prevalence of the disease. It is the go-t

This diversity in the professions that contribute to the criteria found in the DSM-5 can only assist in assuring the validity of the disorders presented within it. The disorders contained in the manual all have a series of specific requirements that an individual must

While reading over the introduction to the DSM-5 I was impressed. I have never looked at any DSM or really any mental health disorders thus far in my studies. I was mostly impressed with the strive to continue making the DSM more useful and understanding. Some things that are in the introduction to the DSM-5 that caught my attention was that the Task Force was very involved in trying to find a balance between the different disorders without confusing them together (p. 5). Another point that I found important was that the overall goal for the DSM-5 was “the degree to which two clinicians could independently arrive at the same diagnosis for a given patient” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 7). This is a strong reasoning to improve the DSM and I am actually stocked that it took this long to change things because Robert Spritzer (a psychiatrist of the twentieth century who became have a strong part in developing the DSM-III and the DSM-IIIR), back in 1974 noticed the central issue being the problem of diagnosis and psychiatrists not being able to agree on the same disorders (Spiegel, 2005).

The DSM is used as a standard of reference for psychological diagnosis. The DSM was originally published in 1952 containing only 106 diagnoses; today the revised DSM-IV-TR contains 365 diagnoses. Throughout the history of the DSM, individuals in the mental health profession have relied on it for clarification of disorders, facilitating research, improving communication with other professionals and improving the collection of clinical information. With a new DSM-V underway, there has been a lot of issues surrounding the contents and classifications of the new DSM. There are

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), “the essential feature of

There hope is to diagnosis and treat the illness at hand. This article questions the validity of diagnosing each patient. If the doctors or the nurses’ diagnosis is wrong then, the treatment will also be wrong. This can create complications for all parties at hand. Most often there is protocol that most doctors have to follow when diagnosing a patient “However, it should not be forgotten that they are all using same diagnostic manual, and probability of diagnosing a person is in depression with same instructions.”(). Now this makes a person question whether the validity is of the doctor or the protocol. If it is the protocol than that is something that needs to be evaluated. At the time the DSM system was in use for diagnosing a patient. At the time of this experiment Rosenhan used the DSM-II statistical evaluation. Years later this statistical data was look over, “According to Mattison, Cantwell, Russell, Will (1979) general inter-rater reliability of DSM-II was about %57 and %54 for axis I in DSM-III. In DSM III, which is published twelve years later after first version of DSM II, reliability scores of psychosis, conduct disorder, hyperactivity, and mental retardation was slightly higher than general reliability scores; however, as it is accepted today with the circumstance of logical base, reliability under 0.7-0.8 is found questionable and possibility of error is

Even though the DSM has harsh critics surrounding the subject of diagnosis, there are those who find that the DSM is beneficial when treating clients. As previously mentioned, Clegg (2012) believes that the DSM can be utilized in various agencies and areas of social work. Social workers from different theoretical perspectives find that the DSM is approachable. The manual outlines the symptoms and diagnostic criteria surrounding a disorder. In addition, the manual highlights intervention plans for the diagnosis. These interventions can assist clients and/or their families in overcoming a diagnosis. Lastly, when clients experience symptoms of a mental disorder for the first time, they may feel defeated and unsure of where these symptoms are originating. When clinicians can diagnose their

Furthermore, Gonvalves, Dantas, and Banzato research that DSM-5 derived harsh criticism and considered secretive by serval authors (p.1). Additionally, they also established authors in the philosophy of psychiatry who underline the importance of values in psychiatric diagnosis, research, treatments, and classification within the manual (p. 2). Actually, Goncalves and colleagues (2016) detected a proposal which was termed Psychosis Risk Syndrome (PRS). Before the DSM-5 was prepared, the Psychotic Disorders Work Group created the PRS proposal as a placeholder for the high-risk disorders (Goncalves, Dantas, & Banzato, 2016, p.2). Yet, the PRS was criticized as premature and confusing

DSM-5 and ICD-11 are used by healthcare providers to study and identify psychological disorders. Nonetheless, these two manuels differ from one another in many ways. DSM-5 is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel of Mental Disorders. It was formed by the American Psychiatric Association to enhance diagnoses, treatment, research methods today. This manuel is used to classify mental disorders by assessing the symptoms that are present in various clinical settings such as outpatient, clinical, and primary care. Then there is the ICD-11 which is the International Classification of Diseases. It was created by the World Health Organizations to define various diseases and report health conditions. This manual is a compilation of definitions, social

For as long as there has been a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), it has been treated as if it contained scientific truths. Yet, is that what the DSM really is? Or, is really only a rough draft of diagnoses based on the supposed consensus of experts? This seems to be the question that drives the explanation and critique forwarded by Dr. Joel Paris in The Intelligent Clinician’s Guide to the DSM-5®.

Everyday, people are diagnosed with different type of disorders as listed in the DSM-5. Their disorder may be on the spectrum of mild to severely debilitating; either way in most cases, they will have to deal with the disorder throughout their lifetime. Throughout the history of psychology, there have been many theoretical perspectives developed that sought to explain why these disorders occur and how these disorders can be treated. Most treatments are synergistic meaning that multiple treatments are often used to help individuals with different disorders because some forms of treatment are not effective against the patient’s disorder or patients are unresponsive to the treatment. This paper focuses on describing and analyzing one of the disorders listed in the Diagnostics manual. In the course of the discussion, there will be detailed

Mood Disorders are the result of severe or manic depression that occurs past a normal state of depression. When one has a normal depressed mood, he or she responds to the quandary of news or event in his or her own life however, are usually able to return to their normal state within a short time. Those who are diagnosed with a Mood Disorder are not able to return to their normal state. The DSM-IV segregates and identifies the distinctiveness of the mood disorders into axes that are then utilized in classifying the disorders to ensure the proper treatment associated for the sufferer. This technique assisted psychiatrists in efficiently rendering a fair diagnosis in moderate to severe disorders. There are more than ten million people

From time to time we all have periods of sadness, unhappy thoughts. Among the United States population, around eight to ten percent suffer from a form of depression as unipolar depression. Depressive and bipolar disorders show to be a principal cause of disability, without cure a person can have a tough experience with relationships, work, and social activities. Substance abuse disorders are becoming an rampant. The need for instant indulgence has become more and more widespread in the world. The DSM-5 shows the symptoms checklist for diagnosis of substance abuse disorder (see table 1.3 in appendix a), and according to Comer, (2014) “the substances people misuse fall into several categories: depressants, stimulants, hallucinogens, and cannabis”

Most psychopathology research to date is guided by the conceptualization of psychopathology adopted by the current nosological systems, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD). These nosological systems conceptualize mental disorders as discrete categorical entities. In these diagnostic manuals, several categories of mental disorder are listed, the membership in which depends on whether an individual meets a number of suggested criteria (APA, 2013; WHO, 2016). Thus, an individual is either a member or nonmember of these categories (Krueger & Markon, 2006a). The DSM-5 acknowledged the limitations of this approach and provided several assumptions that needed to be

The DSM itself states “diagnosis require clinical judgment (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 19) indicating the fact that two therapist may see things differently. This concept would have to be considered a weakness as consensus is key validity and reliability of diagnosis and subsequent treatment. The article goes on to discuss the idea that the diagnosis of mental illness is more of an art form than a scientific process (Zur & Nordmarken, 2016). Finally, the most harsh factor against the DSM-5 is the outcry by leading professionals. The article points out that the chairman of its predecessor the DSM-4 Dr. Allen Frances was a critic of the DSM-5 from the very beginning. Change on any level is difficult so for Dr. Frances to urge caution is one; however, for him to say “this is the saddest moment in a 45 year career” to the American Psychiatric Association’s approval of the DSM-5 is troubling. Dr. Frances is not alone is his objection to this text. The director of the National Institute of Mental Health; Dr. Thomas Insel joined the opposition stating he will drive his organization’s research away from the DSM-5 (Zur & Nordmarken,