Competing definitions of schizophrenia: what can be learned from polydiagnostic studies?

Schizophrenia Bulletin (Impact Factor: 8.61). 10/2007; 33(5):1178-200. DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbl065
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The contemporary diagnoses of schizophrenia (sz)-Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition(DSM-IV) and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision(ICD-10)-are widely considered as important scientific achievements. However, these algorithms were not a product of explicit conceptual analyses and empirical studies but defined through consensus with the purpose of improving reliability. The validity status of current definitions and of their predecessors remains unclear. The so-called "polydiagnostic approach" applies different definitions of a disorder to the same patient sample in order to compare these definitions on potential validity indicators. We reviewed 92 polydiagnostic sz studies published since the early 1970s. Different sz definitions show a considerable variation concerning frequency, concordance, reliability, outcome, and other validity measures. The DSM-IV and the ICD-10 show moderate reliability but both definitions appear weak in terms of concurrent validity, eg, with respect to an aggregation of a priori important features. The first-rank symptoms of Schneider are not associated with family history of sz or with prediction of poor outcome. The introduction of long duration criteria and exclusion of affective syndromes tend to restrict the diagnosis to chronic stable patients. Patients fulfilling the majority of definitions (core sz patients) do not seem to constitute a strongly valid subgroup but rather a severely ill subgroup. Paradoxically, it seems that a century after the introduction of the sz concept, research is still badly needed, concerning conceptual and construct validity of sz, its essential psychopathological features, and phenotypic boundaries.


Available from: Josef Parnas, Apr 24, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The mismatch negativity (MMN) component of the auditory event-related potential has become a valuable tool in cognitive neuroscience. Its reduced size in persons with schizophrenia is of unknown origin but theories proposed include links to problems in experience-dependent plasticity reliant on N-methyl-d-aspartate glutamate receptors. In this review we address the utility of this tool in revealing the nature and time course of problems in perceptual inference in this illness together with its potential for use in translational research testing animal models of schizophrenia-related phenotypes. Specifically, we review the reasons for interest in MMN in schizophrenia, issues pertaining to the measurement of MMN, its use as a vulnerability index for the development of schizophrenia, the pharmacological sensitivity of MMN and the progress in developing animal models of MMN. Within this process we highlight the challenges posed by knowledge gaps pertaining to the tool and the pharmacology of the underlying system.
    Frontiers in Psychiatry 01/2013; 4:171. DOI:10.3389/fpsyt.2013.00171
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The DSM-5 changes to the diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia reflect modest incremental changes. The two most substantial changes, the elimination of subtypes and de-emphasis of Schneiderian First-Rank Symptoms, are a significant departure from long-standing approaches to conceptualizing and defining schizophrenia, but are unlikely to have an appreciable impact on caseness or clinical management. Several minor modifications to the diagnosis are generally useful additions that will likely enhance diagnostic precision. The two most controversial changes that were considered, the addition of dimensional ratings and attenuated psychosis syndrome, were ultimately placed in the third section of DSM-5 for further research and consideration. In sum, the changes demonstrate increased precision of diagnosis, with minimal changes in caseness.
    Clinical Psychology Science and Practice 09/2014; 21(3). DOI:10.1111/cpsp.12071 · 2.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In 2011, over 2.5 million people died from only 15 causes in the United States. Ten of these involved complex or infectious diseases for which there is insufficient knowledge or treatment, such as heart disease, influenza, and Alzheimer's disease.(1) Complex diseases have been difficult to understand due to their multifarious genetic and molecular fingerprints, while certain infectious agents have evolved to elude treatment and prophylaxis. Network medicine provides a macroscopic approach to understanding and treating such illnesses. It integrates experimental data on gene, protein, and metabolic interactions with clinical knowledge of disease and pharmacology in order to extend the understanding of diseases and their treatment. The resulting 'big picture' allows for the development of computational and mathematical methods to identify novel disease pathways and predict patient drug response, among others. In this review, we will discuss recent advances in network medicine.Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2013); accepted article preview online 29 August 2013 doi:10.1038/clpt.2013.168.
    Clinical Pharmacology &#38 Therapeutics 08/2013; 94(6). DOI:10.1038/clpt.2013.168 · 7.39 Impact Factor