Patient advocacy and DSM-5.

Journal: BMC medicine

Volume: 11

Issue: 

Year of Publication: 2013

Affiliated Institutions:  Department of Psychiatry, University of Cape Town and Groote Schuur Hospital J, Anzio Rd, Observatory , Cape Town, South Africa. dan.stein@uct.ac.za

Abstract summary 

The revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) provides a useful opportunity to revisit debates about the nature of psychiatric classification. An important debate concerns the involvement of mental health consumers in revisions of the classification. One perspective argues that psychiatric classification is a scientific process undertaken by scientific experts and that including consumers in the revision process is merely pandering to political correctness. A contrasting perspective is that psychiatric classification is a process driven by a range of different values and that the involvement of patients and patient advocates would enhance this process. Here we draw on our experiences with input from the public during the deliberations of the Obsessive Compulsive-Spectrum Disorders subworkgroup of DSM-5, to help make the argument that psychiatric classification does require reasoned debate on a range of different facts and values, and that it is appropriate for scientist experts to review their nosological recommendations in the light of rigorous consideration of patient experience and feedback.

Authors & Co-authors:  Stein Dan J DJ Phillips Katharine A KA

Study Outcome 

Source Link: Visit source

Statistics
Citations :  Hyman SE. Can neuroscience be integrated into the DSM-V? Nature Rev Neurosci. 2007;8:725–32. doi: 10.1038/nrn2218.
Authors :  2
Identifiers
Doi : 10.1186/1741-7015-11-133
SSN : 1741-7015
Study Population
Male,Female
Mesh Terms
Guidelines as Topic
Other Terms
Study Design
Cross Sectional Study
Study Approach
Country of Study
Publication Country
England