|
|
|||||||||||
The British Journal of Psychiatry 173: 198-202 (1998)
© 1998 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
R Mojtabai and RO Rieder
Department of Psychiatry, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, USA.
BACKGROUND: We critically reviewed the arguments of the symptom- oriented researchers who propose to replace syndromes and diagnostic categories with symptoms as units of analysis in psychiatric research. METHOD: Three central arguments were examined: (a) current diagnostic categories lack reliability and validity; (b) using diagnostic categories leads to misclassification and confounding; and (c) symptom- oriented theories are clearer, easier to test, and more likely to lead to an explanation of psychopathology. These arguments are based on three assumptions respectively: (a) symptoms have higher reliability and validity; (b) underlying pathological processes are symptom- specific; and (c) elucidation of the process of symptom development will lead to (and must precede) the discovery of the causes of syndromes. RESULTS: We found little evidence supporting these assumptions and arguments based on them. CONCLUSION: There are no clear advantages in replacing syndromes with symptoms as units of analysis for psychiatric research.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
G D Honey, P C Fletcher, and E T Bullmore Functional brain mapping of psychopathology J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, April 1, 2002; 72(4): 432 - 439. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Psychiatric Bulletin | Advances in Psychiatric Treatment | All RCPsych Journals |