Ankita Deshmukh’s research while affiliated with KEM Hospital Research Centre and other places

A Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) field trial in India, widely reported racist violence in the United States, and casteist and religious communal conflicts in India highlighted inattention to structural issues affecting mental health problems in the Outline for Cultural Formulation (OCF) and the CFI in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition). Consequently, we revised the OCF as a sociocultural formulation (SCF) to better consider structures of society and culture. We studied and compared clinicians' ratings of SCF case formulations from a constructed assessment instrument (SCF Interview [SCFI]) and the CFI. Socio-cultural formulations from SCFI interviews were rated higher for details of societal structural impact, and overall interrater agreement was better. CFI interviews were rated higher for clinical rapport. Revision of the CFI should enhance consideration of structural issues and incorporate them in SCFs that better integrate assessment process and case formulation content. The need to acknowledge structural sources of mental health problems is clear, and our study indicates how a sociocultural framework may be used for that.

To the Editor In a Viewpoint, Dr Guinart et al¹ highlighted the need for fuller consideration of transcultural psychiatry to better explain cultural variation in clinical trials of psychotropic medicines. As the article suggested, such research is bedeviled by questions of interrater reliability, variations in the expression of stigmatizing emotional experience, and capacity for measuring treatment response. Neglecting cultural contexts distorts the results of clinical trials. Such concerns about cultural validity for effective clinical practice, in fact, motivated formulation of the “new cross-cultural psychiatry” as an upgrade for transcultural psychiatry more than 4 decades ago.

The DSM-IV Outline for Cultural Formulation (OCF) was a framework for assessment based on principles of cultural psychiatry. The Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) for DSM-5 provided a tool enabling wider use of cultural formulation in clinical cultural assessment. Validation to justify the inclusion of the CFI in DSM-5 involved quantitative analysis of debriefing interviews of patients and clinicians for feasibility, acceptability and clinical utility. We now further examine qualitative field trial data from the CFI interviews and the debriefing interviews in Pune, India. Administration of the CFI was followed by routine diagnostic assessment of 36 psychiatric outpatients—11 found to have severe mental disorders (SMD) and 25 with common mental disorders (CMD). Domain-wise thematic analyses of the CFI and debriefing interviews identified recurrent themes based on cultural identity, illness explanatory models, stressful and supportive social relationships, and the impact of political, economic, and cultural contexts. A tendency to elaborate accounts, rather than simply name their problem, and more diverse past help-seeking distinguished CMD from SMD groups. Patients valued the CFI more than clinicians did, and most patients did not consider cultural background differences of clinician-patient relationships to be relevant. Qualitative analysis of CFI data and critical analysis of domain mapping of CFI content to the structure of OCF domains indicated the value of revising the dimensional structure of the OCF. A proposed revision (OCF-R) is expected to better facilitate clinical use and research on cultural formulation and use of the CFI.