Beyond reactive versus endogenous: Should uncomplicated stress-triggered depression be excluded from major depression diagnosis? A review of the evidence

Jerome C. Wakefield, M. F. Schmitz

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    Abstract

    The concept of an uncomplicated depressive episode was introduced in the DSM-III's "bereavement exclusion" to major depressive disorder (MDD). It represented an attempt to distinguish, among depressive reactions to the loss of a loved one, between those depressions that are normal bereavement-related depressive feelings and those that are depressive disorders. As defined by the DSM, an "uncomplicated" depressive episode is one that satisfies the DSM's symptom and duration diagnostic criteria for MDD but does not cause marked impairment, lacks severe pathosuggestive symptoms such as suicidal ideation, psychotic ideation, intense feelings of worthlessness, and psychomotor retardation, and remits after a relatively brief time. Thus, uncomplicated episodes include only symptoms - such as sadness or low mood, crying, decreased pleasure, difficulty concentrating, loss of interest, fatigue, insomnia, and decreased appetite - that are common in normal distress reactions. Recent studies raise the question whether uncomplicated stress-triggered depressive reactions to any major stressor (not just in reaction to bereavement) form a typologically distinct category different from other MDD and indicative of normal distress. Because the uncomplicated/complicated distinction is a distinction between reactive depressions, it does not resuscitate the repudiated endogenous/reactive distinction. We review the sequence of studies that have been carried out recently exploring the validity of the uncomplicated/ complicated distinction as an indicator of normality/disorder across reactive depressions following all stressors, not just bereavement. Both the concurrent validity (with regard to a large range of validators) and predictive validity (using recurrence as a validator) of the uncomplicated/complicated distinction have been subjected to rigorous tests for the first time, and the results consistently support the validity of the distinction. However, initial studies of concurrent validity suffered from a series of methodological limitations, leaving the answer inconclusive. Recent studies have systematically addressed all of the major objections to the early studies. The results disconfirm the earlier objections and strongly support the validity of the uncomplicated/ complicated distinction as an indicator of normal versus disordered depressive episodes. If the uncomplicated/complicated distinction has validity across stressors, this has important potential prognostic and treatment implications, and might also contribute to a much-needed clarification of the boundary between intense normal sadness and depressive disorder.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)251-275
    Number of pages25
    JournalMinerva Psichiatrica
    Volume53
    Issue number4
    StatePublished - Dec 1 2012

    Fingerprint

    Bereavement
    Major Depressive Disorder
    Depression
    Adjustment Disorders
    Depressive Disorder
    Emotions
    Crying
    Suicidal Ideation
    Pleasure
    Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders
    Appetite
    Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
    Fatigue
    Cohort Studies
    Recurrence
    Therapeutics

    Keywords

    • Bereavement
    • Depression
    • Diagnosis
    • Grief
    • Stress, psychological

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Psychiatry and Mental health

    Cite this

    Beyond reactive versus endogenous : Should uncomplicated stress-triggered depression be excluded from major depression diagnosis? A review of the evidence. / Wakefield, Jerome C.; Schmitz, M. F.

    In: Minerva Psichiatrica, Vol. 53, No. 4, 01.12.2012, p. 251-275.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    @article{51ff66f06bc54811ab967bf3a1710e9f,
    title = "Beyond reactive versus endogenous: Should uncomplicated stress-triggered depression be excluded from major depression diagnosis? A review of the evidence",
    abstract = "The concept of an uncomplicated depressive episode was introduced in the DSM-III's {"}bereavement exclusion{"} to major depressive disorder (MDD). It represented an attempt to distinguish, among depressive reactions to the loss of a loved one, between those depressions that are normal bereavement-related depressive feelings and those that are depressive disorders. As defined by the DSM, an {"}uncomplicated{"} depressive episode is one that satisfies the DSM's symptom and duration diagnostic criteria for MDD but does not cause marked impairment, lacks severe pathosuggestive symptoms such as suicidal ideation, psychotic ideation, intense feelings of worthlessness, and psychomotor retardation, and remits after a relatively brief time. Thus, uncomplicated episodes include only symptoms - such as sadness or low mood, crying, decreased pleasure, difficulty concentrating, loss of interest, fatigue, insomnia, and decreased appetite - that are common in normal distress reactions. Recent studies raise the question whether uncomplicated stress-triggered depressive reactions to any major stressor (not just in reaction to bereavement) form a typologically distinct category different from other MDD and indicative of normal distress. Because the uncomplicated/complicated distinction is a distinction between reactive depressions, it does not resuscitate the repudiated endogenous/reactive distinction. We review the sequence of studies that have been carried out recently exploring the validity of the uncomplicated/ complicated distinction as an indicator of normality/disorder across reactive depressions following all stressors, not just bereavement. Both the concurrent validity (with regard to a large range of validators) and predictive validity (using recurrence as a validator) of the uncomplicated/complicated distinction have been subjected to rigorous tests for the first time, and the results consistently support the validity of the distinction. However, initial studies of concurrent validity suffered from a series of methodological limitations, leaving the answer inconclusive. Recent studies have systematically addressed all of the major objections to the early studies. The results disconfirm the earlier objections and strongly support the validity of the uncomplicated/ complicated distinction as an indicator of normal versus disordered depressive episodes. If the uncomplicated/complicated distinction has validity across stressors, this has important potential prognostic and treatment implications, and might also contribute to a much-needed clarification of the boundary between intense normal sadness and depressive disorder.",
    keywords = "Bereavement, Depression, Diagnosis, Grief, Stress, psychological",
    author = "Wakefield, {Jerome C.} and Schmitz, {M. F.}",
    year = "2012",
    month = "12",
    day = "1",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "53",
    pages = "251--275",
    journal = "Minerva Psichiatrica",
    issn = "0391-1772",
    publisher = "Edizioni Minerva Medica S.p.A.",
    number = "4",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Beyond reactive versus endogenous

    T2 - Should uncomplicated stress-triggered depression be excluded from major depression diagnosis? A review of the evidence

    AU - Wakefield, Jerome C.

    AU - Schmitz, M. F.

    PY - 2012/12/1

    Y1 - 2012/12/1

    N2 - The concept of an uncomplicated depressive episode was introduced in the DSM-III's "bereavement exclusion" to major depressive disorder (MDD). It represented an attempt to distinguish, among depressive reactions to the loss of a loved one, between those depressions that are normal bereavement-related depressive feelings and those that are depressive disorders. As defined by the DSM, an "uncomplicated" depressive episode is one that satisfies the DSM's symptom and duration diagnostic criteria for MDD but does not cause marked impairment, lacks severe pathosuggestive symptoms such as suicidal ideation, psychotic ideation, intense feelings of worthlessness, and psychomotor retardation, and remits after a relatively brief time. Thus, uncomplicated episodes include only symptoms - such as sadness or low mood, crying, decreased pleasure, difficulty concentrating, loss of interest, fatigue, insomnia, and decreased appetite - that are common in normal distress reactions. Recent studies raise the question whether uncomplicated stress-triggered depressive reactions to any major stressor (not just in reaction to bereavement) form a typologically distinct category different from other MDD and indicative of normal distress. Because the uncomplicated/complicated distinction is a distinction between reactive depressions, it does not resuscitate the repudiated endogenous/reactive distinction. We review the sequence of studies that have been carried out recently exploring the validity of the uncomplicated/ complicated distinction as an indicator of normality/disorder across reactive depressions following all stressors, not just bereavement. Both the concurrent validity (with regard to a large range of validators) and predictive validity (using recurrence as a validator) of the uncomplicated/complicated distinction have been subjected to rigorous tests for the first time, and the results consistently support the validity of the distinction. However, initial studies of concurrent validity suffered from a series of methodological limitations, leaving the answer inconclusive. Recent studies have systematically addressed all of the major objections to the early studies. The results disconfirm the earlier objections and strongly support the validity of the uncomplicated/ complicated distinction as an indicator of normal versus disordered depressive episodes. If the uncomplicated/complicated distinction has validity across stressors, this has important potential prognostic and treatment implications, and might also contribute to a much-needed clarification of the boundary between intense normal sadness and depressive disorder.

    AB - The concept of an uncomplicated depressive episode was introduced in the DSM-III's "bereavement exclusion" to major depressive disorder (MDD). It represented an attempt to distinguish, among depressive reactions to the loss of a loved one, between those depressions that are normal bereavement-related depressive feelings and those that are depressive disorders. As defined by the DSM, an "uncomplicated" depressive episode is one that satisfies the DSM's symptom and duration diagnostic criteria for MDD but does not cause marked impairment, lacks severe pathosuggestive symptoms such as suicidal ideation, psychotic ideation, intense feelings of worthlessness, and psychomotor retardation, and remits after a relatively brief time. Thus, uncomplicated episodes include only symptoms - such as sadness or low mood, crying, decreased pleasure, difficulty concentrating, loss of interest, fatigue, insomnia, and decreased appetite - that are common in normal distress reactions. Recent studies raise the question whether uncomplicated stress-triggered depressive reactions to any major stressor (not just in reaction to bereavement) form a typologically distinct category different from other MDD and indicative of normal distress. Because the uncomplicated/complicated distinction is a distinction between reactive depressions, it does not resuscitate the repudiated endogenous/reactive distinction. We review the sequence of studies that have been carried out recently exploring the validity of the uncomplicated/ complicated distinction as an indicator of normality/disorder across reactive depressions following all stressors, not just bereavement. Both the concurrent validity (with regard to a large range of validators) and predictive validity (using recurrence as a validator) of the uncomplicated/complicated distinction have been subjected to rigorous tests for the first time, and the results consistently support the validity of the distinction. However, initial studies of concurrent validity suffered from a series of methodological limitations, leaving the answer inconclusive. Recent studies have systematically addressed all of the major objections to the early studies. The results disconfirm the earlier objections and strongly support the validity of the uncomplicated/ complicated distinction as an indicator of normal versus disordered depressive episodes. If the uncomplicated/complicated distinction has validity across stressors, this has important potential prognostic and treatment implications, and might also contribute to a much-needed clarification of the boundary between intense normal sadness and depressive disorder.

    KW - Bereavement

    KW - Depression

    KW - Diagnosis

    KW - Grief

    KW - Stress, psychological

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84875360692&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84875360692&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    M3 - Review article

    AN - SCOPUS:84875360692

    VL - 53

    SP - 251

    EP - 275

    JO - Minerva Psichiatrica

    JF - Minerva Psichiatrica

    SN - 0391-1772

    IS - 4

    ER -