The long and winding road of schizophrenia research.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Assen Jablensky.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
An overview is presented of the historical background to the current classification of personality disorders in ICD-10 and DSM-IV. Although the precursors of the present diagnostic concepts were originally developed as dimensional or prototype typologies, both ICD-10 and DSM-IV have adopted a quasi-nosological, categorical model of personality disorders on Axis II. It is argued that the model is fundamentally flawed and restricts the capacity to collect and communicate relevant data on the impact of personality characteristics on the manifestations, course and outcome of Axis I disorders. Dimensional models originating in recent psychological research offer an alternative, but considerable theoretical and field research work will be required before a meaningful and generally acceptable restructuring of Axis II becomes feasible.
Being descendants of the Kraepelinian nosology, DSM-IV and ICD-10 rely largely on the internal cohesion of the clinical picture and the pattern of course and outcome as validating criteria of the definitions of mental disorders. The majority of the research diagnostic criteria are provisional and should be extensively tested against empirical evidence. The crucial issue is whether psychiatric disorders, as currently defined in DSM-IV and ICD-10, are clearly separated from one another and from normality. Options for future revisions of the classifications include categorical typologies, dimensional models and empirically derived prototypes. The advantages and disadvantages of each option are outlined, highlighting the need for new research focusing on these critical issues.