Literature DB >> 23331066

Can the DSM's major depression bereavement exclusion be validly extended to other stressors? Evidence from the NCS.

J C Wakefield1, M F Schmitz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the DSM's distinction between uncomplicated (normal) vs. complicated (disordered) bereavement-related depressive episodes can be validly extended to non-bereavement stressor-related depression (SRD). Previous findings supporting the uncomplicated/complicated SRD distinction's discriminant validity were criticized as tautological because of definitional biases (e.g., 'uncomplicated' requires brief duration, yet duration was a validator). We tested whether uncomplicated/complicated SRD validator differences are tautological or real.
METHOD: Using National Comorbidity Survey data, we compared uncomplicated SRDs, complicated SRDs, and endogenous/psychotic MDD on levels of eight pathology validators. We identified definitional biases affecting six validators, and corrected them by deleting the biasing definitional components and recalculating validator levels.
RESULTS: After correction of biases, uncomplicated SRDs had significantly lower pathology levels than both complicated SRDs and endogenous/psychotic MDD on seven of eight validators, disconfirming the tautology hypothesis. Regression analysis revealed that 'uncomplicated' cannot be equated with 'mild'. Extending the 'uncomplicated' durational threshold from 2 to 6 months yielded equal or stronger discriminant validity, suggesting the arbitrariness of the current durational criterion.
CONCLUSION: Uncomplicated SRDs' lower pathology levels are because of real syndromal differences, not definitional tautologies. The uncomplicated/complicated distinction has discriminant validity when extended to non-bereavement SRDs as an indicator of normality vs. disorder.
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DSM-5; Major depression; bereavement exclusion; diagnostic validity; harmful dysfunction

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23331066     DOI: 10.1111/acps.12064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Psychiatr Scand        ISSN: 0001-690X            Impact factor:   6.392


  4 in total

1.  DSM-5 grief scorecard: Assessment and outcomes of proposals to pathologize grief.

Authors:  Jerome C Wakefield
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 49.548

2.  Uncomplicated depression is normal sadness, not depressive disorder: further evidence from the NESARC.

Authors:  Jerome C Wakefield; Mark F Schmitz
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 49.548

3.  DSM-5, psychiatric epidemiology and the false positives problem.

Authors:  J C Wakefield
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2015-02-13       Impact factor: 6.892

4.  Klerman's "credo" reconsidered: neo-Kraepelinianism, Spitzer's views, and what we can learn from the past.

Authors:  Jerome C Wakefield
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 49.548

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.