The contribution of Latin American and Caribbean countries on culture bound syndromes studies for the ICD-10 revision: key findings from a working in progress.

Centro de Economia em Saúde Mental, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria (Impact Factor: 1.64). 05/2011; 33 Suppl 1:S5-20.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This review aims to verify the scientific evidences for the inclusion of culture bound syndromes in the International Classification of Diseases towards its 11th edition based on studies from Latin American and Caribbean countries.
Studies were identified in Medline, LILACS and EMBASE databases for the period between 1992 and 2008, and then classified according to the type of study, to the mental disorder, country and number of publications per year.
163 studies were selected and classified: 33 in MedlLne, 90 in EMBASE e 40 in LILACS. The percentage of culture bound-syndrome corresponded to 9% in Medline, 12% in EMBASE e 2.5% in LILACS. Among fifteen studies on cultural bound syndromes, two were about "nervios and ataque de nervios", two about "susto", four about the relationship between religion beliefs, witchery, trance and mental disorders, one with a proposal for new diagnostic category, three about theoretic issues and three about the pathoplasty of mental disorders.
The scarcity of studies on culture bound syndromes might be due to the indexation problems hindering the screening of studies; lack of interest on publishing such studies in indexed journals (publication bias) and due to difficulty to access them. There is no robust evidence identified among cross-cultural studies to recommend changes for International Classification of Diseases-11th edition.

Download full-text


Available from: Denise Razzouk, Sep 16, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A reason for the necessity to revise ICD-10 and DSM-IV is the increase of knowledge in the past 20 years, especially neurobiological knowledge. But is this increase of knowledge, for example in the field of neurogenetics, of such magnitude that a revision of the psychiatric classification is necessary and promises to be fruitful? The current plans for DSM-V or ICD-11, respectively, focus on different improvements. In this context also the introduction of a purely syndromatic/dimensional approach without including etiopathogenetic hypotheses, is discussed. A switch to such a dimensional approach, which was discussed among others in the DSM-V task force Deconstructing Psychosis, would be the most radical development. It could avoid many theoretical pre-assumptions about causal hypotheses, which are still associated with ICD-10 and DSM-IV. This would indeed increase the validity of psychiatric classification, but it would also reduce the information as compared to traditional diagnostic categories with all the current implications concerning etiopathogenesis, therapy and prognosis. Such a dimensional approach would also mean that the syndromes would have to be assessed in a standardized way for each person seeking help from the psychiatric service system or for each person undergoing psychiatric research. This would have to be a multi-dimensional assessment covering all syndromes existing within different psychiatric disorders. Based on the different aspects that must be considered in this context, a careful revision seems more advisable than a radical change of classification.
    Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 10/2009; 63(5):595-612. DOI:10.1111/j.1440-1819.2009.02020.x · 1.62 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The unprecedented inclusion of culture-bound syndromes in DSM-IV provides the opportunity for highlighting the need to study such syndromes and the occasion for developing a research agenda to study them. The growing ethnic and cultural diversity of the U.S. population presents a challenge to the mental health field to develop truly cross-cultural approaches to mental health research and services. In this article, the authors provide a critique of previous analyses of the relationship between culture-bound syndromes and psychiatric diagnoses. They highlight the problems in previous classificatory exercises, which tend to focus on subsuming the culture-bound syndromes into psychiatric categories and fail to fully investigate these syndromes on their own terms. A detailed research program based on four key questions is presented both to understand culture-bound syndromes within their cultural context and to analyze the relationship between these syndromes and psychiatric disorders. Results of over a decade of research on ataques de nervios, a Latino-Caribbean cultural syndrome, are used to illustrate this research program. The four questions focus on the nature of the phenomenon, the social-cultural location of sufferers, the relationship of culture-bound syndromes to psychiatric disorders, and the social and psychiatric history of the syndrome in the life course of the sufferer.
    American Journal of Psychiatry 10/1999; 156(9):1322-7. · 13.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Psychiatric diagnosis and classification reflect the social and political context of an era and are embedded in it. In the last few decades, culture-bound syndromes reported in non-Western societies constituted the major focus of contention over the validity and universality of psychiatric diagnosis. In contemporary times, social, economic, and political factors, such as the hegemony of the DSM discourse, the managed care culture, pharmaceutical forces, and the global burden of disease study, have virtually made culture-bound syndromes 'disappear'. Once widely believed to be rare outside of the developed West, depression has rapidly become the master narrative of mental health worldwide. In the context of global mental health, the field of psychiatric classification must go beyond routine debates over categories. In order to address the growing discrepancy between needs and services, international cultural psychiatry must engage key social forces, such as psychiatric epidemiology, primary care psychiatry, integration of diagnostic systems, stigma, and advocacy.
    Psychopathology 03/2002; 35(2-3):152-7. DOI:10.1159/000065136 · 1.56 Impact Factor
Show more