As the publication date draws closer, concerns grow over the proposed format of the DSM-5
The American Psychiatric Association is currently undertaking a major revision of the Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, and the 5th edition (DSM-5) is due to be published in May 2013. The process of the revision of this publication has been mired in controversy. As we approach its proposed date of publication, the controversy has only grown, with considerable spread of debate into the broader community. Concern about the process of revision of the DSM initially highlighted a number of procedural issues, especially with regard to the manner in which members of the DSM-5 taskforce were committed to secrecy by a confidentiality agreement.1 Concerns have also been voiced about the degree to which members of the taskforce have substantive ongoing or past relationships with the pharmaceutical industry and whether these are adequately mitigated by the current conflict of interest policy.2
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Carey B. Psychiatrists revise the book of human troubles. New York Times 2008; 17 Dec: A1. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/18/health/18psych.html?pagewanted=all (accessed Apr 2012).
- 2. Cosgrove L, Krimsky S. A comparison of DSM-IV and DSM-5 panel members’ financial associations with industry: a pernicious problem persists. PLoS Med 2012; 9: e1001190. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001190.
- 3. Helzer JE, Kraemer HC, Krueger RF, et al, editors. Dimensional approaches in diagnostic classification: refining the research agenda for DSM–V. American Psychiatric Publishing, 2008.
- 4. Luyten P, Blatt SJ. Looking back towards the future: is it time to change the DSM approach to psychiatric disorders? The case of depression. Psychiatry 2007; 70: 85-99.
- 5. Frances A. Whither DSM-V? Br J Psychiatry 2009; 195: 391-392.
- 6. Pilkonis PA, Hallquist MN, Morse JQ, Stepp SD. Striking the (im)proper balance between scientific advances and clinical utility: commentary on the DSM-5 proposal for personality disorders. Personal Disord 2011; 2: 68-82.
- 7. Woods SW, Walsh BC, Saksa JR, McGlashan TH. The case for including Attenuated Psychotic Symptoms Syndrome in DSM-5 as a psychosis risk syndrome. Schizophr Res 2010; 123: 199-207.
- 8. Yang LH, Wonpat-Borja AJ, Opler MG, Corcoran CM. Potential stigma associated with inclusion of the psychosis risk syndrome in the DSM-V: an empirical question. Schizophr Res 2010; 120: 42-48.
- 9. Ruhrmann S, Schultze-Lutter F, Klosterkötter J. Probably at-risk, but certainly ill — advocating the introduction of a psychosis spectrum disorder in DSM-V. Schizophr Res 2010; 120: 23-37.
- 10. Wakefield JC, First MB. Validity of the bereavement exclusion to major depression: does the empirical evidence support the proposal to eliminate the exclusion in DSM-5? World Psychiatry 2012; 11: 3-10.
No relevant disclosures.