DSM-5: Proposed changes to depressive disorders

Jerome C. Wakefield

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    Abstract

    The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is currently undergoing a revision that will lead to a fifth edition in 2013. Proposed changes for DSM-5 include the creation of several new categories of depressive disorder. Some nosologists have expressed concern that the proposed changes could yield many 'false-positive diagnoses' in which normal distress is mislabeled as a mental disorder. Such confusion of normal distress and mental disorder undermines the interpretability of clinical trials and etiological research, causes inefficient allocation of resources, and incurs risks of unnecessary treatment. To evaluate these concerns, I critically examine five proposed DSM-5 expansions in the scope of depressive and grief disorders: (1) a new mixed anxiety/depression category; (2) a new premenstrual dysphoric disorder category; (3) elimination of the major depression bereavement exclusion; (4) elimination of the adjustment disorder bereavement exclusion, thus allowing the diagnosis of subsyndromal depressive symptoms during bereavement as adjustment disorders; and (5) a new category of adjustment disorder related to bereavement for diagnosing pathological non-depressive grief. I examine each proposal's face validity and conceptual coherence as well as empirical support where relevant, with special attention to potential implications for false-positive diagnoses. I conclude that mixed anxiety/depression and premenstrual dysphoric disorder are needed categories, but are too broadly drawn and will yield substantial false positives; that the elimination of the bereavement exclusion is not supported by the evidence; and that the proposed elimination of the adjustment-disorder bereavement exclusion, as well as the new category of grief-related adjustment disorder, are inconsistent with recent grief research, which suggests that these proposals would massively pathologize normal grief responses.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)335-343
    Number of pages9
    JournalCurrent Medical Research and Opinion
    Volume28
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Mar 1 2012

    Fingerprint

    Bereavement
    Adjustment Disorders
    Depressive Disorder
    Grief
    Elimination Disorders
    Depression
    Mental Disorders
    Anxiety
    Confusion
    Resource Allocation
    Research
    Reproducibility of Results
    Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
    Clinical Trials

    Keywords

    • Adjustment disorder
    • Bereavement
    • Diagnosis
    • DSM-5
    • False positives
    • Grief
    • Harmful dysfunction
    • Major depression
    • Mixed anxiety/depression
    • Premenstrual dysphoric disorder
    • Validity

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Medicine(all)

    Cite this

    DSM-5 : Proposed changes to depressive disorders. / Wakefield, Jerome C.

    In: Current Medical Research and Opinion, Vol. 28, No. 3, 01.03.2012, p. 335-343.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    Wakefield, Jerome C. / DSM-5 : Proposed changes to depressive disorders. In: Current Medical Research and Opinion. 2012 ; Vol. 28, No. 3. pp. 335-343.
    @article{2638c05030df4cf3bd4baf81a60475d9,
    title = "DSM-5: Proposed changes to depressive disorders",
    abstract = "The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is currently undergoing a revision that will lead to a fifth edition in 2013. Proposed changes for DSM-5 include the creation of several new categories of depressive disorder. Some nosologists have expressed concern that the proposed changes could yield many 'false-positive diagnoses' in which normal distress is mislabeled as a mental disorder. Such confusion of normal distress and mental disorder undermines the interpretability of clinical trials and etiological research, causes inefficient allocation of resources, and incurs risks of unnecessary treatment. To evaluate these concerns, I critically examine five proposed DSM-5 expansions in the scope of depressive and grief disorders: (1) a new mixed anxiety/depression category; (2) a new premenstrual dysphoric disorder category; (3) elimination of the major depression bereavement exclusion; (4) elimination of the adjustment disorder bereavement exclusion, thus allowing the diagnosis of subsyndromal depressive symptoms during bereavement as adjustment disorders; and (5) a new category of adjustment disorder related to bereavement for diagnosing pathological non-depressive grief. I examine each proposal's face validity and conceptual coherence as well as empirical support where relevant, with special attention to potential implications for false-positive diagnoses. I conclude that mixed anxiety/depression and premenstrual dysphoric disorder are needed categories, but are too broadly drawn and will yield substantial false positives; that the elimination of the bereavement exclusion is not supported by the evidence; and that the proposed elimination of the adjustment-disorder bereavement exclusion, as well as the new category of grief-related adjustment disorder, are inconsistent with recent grief research, which suggests that these proposals would massively pathologize normal grief responses.",
    keywords = "Adjustment disorder, Bereavement, Diagnosis, DSM-5, False positives, Grief, Harmful dysfunction, Major depression, Mixed anxiety/depression, Premenstrual dysphoric disorder, Validity",
    author = "Wakefield, {Jerome C.}",
    year = "2012",
    month = "3",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1185/03007995.2011.653436",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "28",
    pages = "335--343",
    journal = "Current Medical Research and Opinion",
    issn = "0300-7995",
    publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
    number = "3",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - DSM-5

    T2 - Proposed changes to depressive disorders

    AU - Wakefield, Jerome C.

    PY - 2012/3/1

    Y1 - 2012/3/1

    N2 - The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is currently undergoing a revision that will lead to a fifth edition in 2013. Proposed changes for DSM-5 include the creation of several new categories of depressive disorder. Some nosologists have expressed concern that the proposed changes could yield many 'false-positive diagnoses' in which normal distress is mislabeled as a mental disorder. Such confusion of normal distress and mental disorder undermines the interpretability of clinical trials and etiological research, causes inefficient allocation of resources, and incurs risks of unnecessary treatment. To evaluate these concerns, I critically examine five proposed DSM-5 expansions in the scope of depressive and grief disorders: (1) a new mixed anxiety/depression category; (2) a new premenstrual dysphoric disorder category; (3) elimination of the major depression bereavement exclusion; (4) elimination of the adjustment disorder bereavement exclusion, thus allowing the diagnosis of subsyndromal depressive symptoms during bereavement as adjustment disorders; and (5) a new category of adjustment disorder related to bereavement for diagnosing pathological non-depressive grief. I examine each proposal's face validity and conceptual coherence as well as empirical support where relevant, with special attention to potential implications for false-positive diagnoses. I conclude that mixed anxiety/depression and premenstrual dysphoric disorder are needed categories, but are too broadly drawn and will yield substantial false positives; that the elimination of the bereavement exclusion is not supported by the evidence; and that the proposed elimination of the adjustment-disorder bereavement exclusion, as well as the new category of grief-related adjustment disorder, are inconsistent with recent grief research, which suggests that these proposals would massively pathologize normal grief responses.

    AB - The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is currently undergoing a revision that will lead to a fifth edition in 2013. Proposed changes for DSM-5 include the creation of several new categories of depressive disorder. Some nosologists have expressed concern that the proposed changes could yield many 'false-positive diagnoses' in which normal distress is mislabeled as a mental disorder. Such confusion of normal distress and mental disorder undermines the interpretability of clinical trials and etiological research, causes inefficient allocation of resources, and incurs risks of unnecessary treatment. To evaluate these concerns, I critically examine five proposed DSM-5 expansions in the scope of depressive and grief disorders: (1) a new mixed anxiety/depression category; (2) a new premenstrual dysphoric disorder category; (3) elimination of the major depression bereavement exclusion; (4) elimination of the adjustment disorder bereavement exclusion, thus allowing the diagnosis of subsyndromal depressive symptoms during bereavement as adjustment disorders; and (5) a new category of adjustment disorder related to bereavement for diagnosing pathological non-depressive grief. I examine each proposal's face validity and conceptual coherence as well as empirical support where relevant, with special attention to potential implications for false-positive diagnoses. I conclude that mixed anxiety/depression and premenstrual dysphoric disorder are needed categories, but are too broadly drawn and will yield substantial false positives; that the elimination of the bereavement exclusion is not supported by the evidence; and that the proposed elimination of the adjustment-disorder bereavement exclusion, as well as the new category of grief-related adjustment disorder, are inconsistent with recent grief research, which suggests that these proposals would massively pathologize normal grief responses.

    KW - Adjustment disorder

    KW - Bereavement

    KW - Diagnosis

    KW - DSM-5

    KW - False positives

    KW - Grief

    KW - Harmful dysfunction

    KW - Major depression

    KW - Mixed anxiety/depression

    KW - Premenstrual dysphoric disorder

    KW - Validity

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84858189002&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84858189002&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1185/03007995.2011.653436

    DO - 10.1185/03007995.2011.653436

    M3 - Review article

    C2 - 22201516

    AN - SCOPUS:84858189002

    VL - 28

    SP - 335

    EP - 343

    JO - Current Medical Research and Opinion

    JF - Current Medical Research and Opinion

    SN - 0300-7995

    IS - 3

    ER -