Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R L Spitzer

Publications and source records attributed to R L Spitzer.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
PubMed1981

The diagnostic status of homosexuality in DSM-III: a reformulation of the issues.

In 1973 homosexuality per se was removed from the DSM-II classification of mental disorders and replaced by the category Sexual Orientation Disturbance. This represented a compromise between the view that preferential homosexuality is invariably a mental disorder and the view that it is merely a normal sexual variant. While the 1973 DSM-II controversy was highly public, more recently a related but less public controversy involved what became the DSM-III category of Ego-dystonic Homosexuality. The author presents the DSM-III controversy and a reformulation of the issues involved in the diagnostic status of homosexuality. He argues that what is at issue is a value judgment about heterosexuality, rather than a factual dispute about homosexuality.

Arousal↗
PubMed1980

The Psychiatric Status Schedule for epidemiological research. Methodological considerations.

The Psychiatric Status Schedule (PSS) was designed to improve the research value of clinical judgments in the assessment of psychopathology. Although constructed with data from psychiatric patients, it is also intended for use in case finding, as in epidemiological studies of the general population. Its usefulness for this purpose has been questioned on the basis of the low internal consistency of many of the PSS scales in a general population sample and strata thereof. We challenged this methodological stance. Using the same data set, the PSS can be shown to have validity for epidemiological use, in that it discriminates outpatients from the general population and identifies psychiatric "cases" variously defined.

Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted↗
PubMed1980

DSM-III: the major achievements and an overview.

DSM-III will be published early this year. In the first part of this article the authors describe some of the major achievements of DSM-III: the process of its development, reaching consensus on many controversial diagnostic categories and a definition of mental disorder, the provision of diagnostic criteria and a multiaxial evaluation system, and the demonstration of improved diagnostic reliability. In the second part of the article the authors present an overview of DSM-III in which they describe its departures from DSM-II and the reasons for these changes. They conclude that in the next few years there should be systematic study of DSM-III in use, so that information about its strengths and limitations can be made available to those responsible for developing DSM-IV.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1979

Crossing the border into borderline personality and borderline schizophrenia. The development of criteria.

Although there is a large psychiatric literature on various "borderline" conditions, there has been no agreement as to the definition of the concept. A review of the literature reviewed two major uses of the term: Borderline Schizophrenia and Borderline Personality. Two item sets were developed to provide diagnostic criteria for the two concepts. High sensitivity and specificity were demonstrated for both item sets using data describing 808 borderline and 808 control patients. These criteria will be used in the forthcoming DSM-III classification for the categories of Borderline Personality Disorder and Schizotypal Personality Disorder.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1979

Justification for separating schizotypal and borderline personality disorders.

Siever and Gunderson (1979) have questioned the decision to separate Schizotypal Personality Disorder from Borderline Personality Disorder in DSM-III. The justification for this separation rests not on genetic evidence, but rather on the relative independence of the behavioral characteristics of two dimensions that up to now have both been referred to with the appellation "borderline." We believe that this separation provides the tools with which investigators may usefully study the interaction of genetic and environmental factors as they relate to personality and the major psychiatric disorders. The benefits of this separation are already apparent in that research investigators are now using two terms to describe different phenomena, when previously they were using the single term borderline. Proposed diagnostic criteria for Schizotypal Personality Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder are appended.

Chronic Disease↗
PubMed1979

Use of the Research Diagnostic Criteria and the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia to study affective disorders.

In a pilot study of 150 manic or depressive patients, the authors used the Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) and the Schedule for Affective Disorders and schizophrenia (SADS) to perform preliminary analysis of symptom pictures of the index episode of different diagnostic groups, joint diagnostic classification of the different subtypes of major depressive disorder, and differential outcome by diagnostic groups. The results suggest that schizophrenic symptoms in affective disorders do have diagnostic and prognostic significance, that the term "psychotic depression" should be limited to impaired reality testing without reference to degree of incapacitation, that situational-nonsituational and endogenous-nonendogenous classifications are separate depressive subtypes, and that it may not be true that patients with endogenous major depressive disorder have a better prognosis than patients with nonendogenous depression.

Adjustment Disorders↗
PubMed1979

DSM-III field trials: I. Initial interrater diagnostic reliability.

The interrater agreement for major diagnostic categories in studies using DSM-I and DSM-II was usually only fair or poor. In phase one of the DSM-III field trials the overall kappa coefficient of agreement for axis I diagnoses of 281 adult patients was .78 for joint interviews and .66 for diagnoses made after separate interviews; for axis II--personality disorders and specific developmental disorders--the coefficients of agreement were .61 and .54. The interrater reliability of DSM--III is, in general, higher than that previously achieved and may be due to changes in the classification itself, the separation of axis I from axis II conditions, the systematic description of the various disorders, and the inclusion of diagnostic criteria.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1979

DSM-III field trials: II. Initial experience with the multiaxial system.

The multiaxial system of DSM-III includes nondiagnostic data that are valuable in understanding possible etiological factors and in treatment planning and prognosis. The authors describe the reliability of axis IV--severity of psychosocial stressors--and axis V--highest level of adaptive functioning in the past year--for 281 adult patients interviewed in phase one of the DSM-III field trials. The kappa coefficient of agreement for axis IV was .62 for joint interviews and .58 for separate interviews, which the authors consider at least fair. Reliability for axis V was quite good, .80 for joint interviews and .69 for separate interviews. Eighty-one percent of the participating clinicians judged the multiaxial system to be a useful addition to traditional diagnostic evaluation, although many indicated that they had difficulty quantifying severity of psychosocial stressors.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1978

Research diagnostic criteria: rationale and reliability.

A crucial problem in psychiatry, affecting clinical work as well as research, is the generally low reliability of current psychiatric diagnostic procedures. This article describes the development and initial reliability studies of a set of specific diagnostic criteria for a selected group of functional psychiatric disorders, the Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC). The RDC are being widely used to study a variety of research issues, particularly those related to genetics, psychobiology of selected mental disorders, and treatment outcome. The data presented here indicate high reliability for diagnostic judgments made using these criteria.

Alcoholism↗
PubMed1978

A diagnostic interview: the schedule for affective disorders and schizophrenia.

The Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (SADS) was developed to reduce information variance in both the descriptive and diagnostic evaluation of a subject. The SADS is unique among rating scales in that it provides for (1) a detailed description of the features of the current episodes of illness when they were at their most severe; (2) a description of the level of severity of manifestations of major dimensions of psychopathology during the week preceding the evaluation, which can then be used as a measure of change; (3) a progression of questions and criteria, which provides information for making diagnoses; and (4) a detailed description of past psychopathology and functioning relevant to an evaluation of diagnosis, prognosis, and overall severity of disturbance. This article reports on initial scale development and reliability studies of the items and the scale scores.

Bipolar Disorder↗
PubMed1978

Hysteria split asunder.

The authors present the proposed DSM-III classification of the traditional hysterical disorders, i.e., disorders that suggest physical illness but in which psychological factors are judged to be of importance. The use of the DSM-III inclusion and exclusion criteria--physical mechanism explains the symptoms, symptoms are linked to psychological factors, symptom initiation is under voluntary control, and there is an obvious recognizable environmental goal--are discussed in the differential diagnosis of somatoform disorder, factitious disorder, malingering, psychological factors affecting physical condition, and undiagnosed physical illness.

Conversion Disorder↗
PubMed1978

A new method of classification for psychophysiologic disorders.

The authors suggest that there are a number of shortcomings in DSM-II's classification system for psychophysiologic disorders, which lists this group of disorders as a distinct group of diseases different from other organic diseases. They propose a new, multiaxial method of classification in which the clinician could indicate the role of psychological factors in the initiation, exacerbation, or maintenance of any physical disorder. This method would make it possible for the first time in psychiatric nomenclature to indicate a clinical judgment of the importance of psychological factors in all physical disorders rather than focusing on a small group of illnesses traditionally regarded as psychosomatic or psychophysiologic.

Humans↗