Data and clinical utility should be the drivers of changes to psychiatric classification

British Journal of Psychiatry

Volumn 197, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 158-

  Craddock, Nick ^a   Owen, Michael J ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; DATA ANALYSIS; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; LETTER; MOOD DISORDER; NEUROSCIENCE; PSYCHIATRIC DIAGNOSIS; PSYCHOSIS;

HUMANS; MENTAL DISORDERS; PSYCHIATRY;

EID: 77955403499     PISSN: 00071250     EISSN: 14721465     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.197.2.158     Document Type: Letter

References (5)

1. Goldberg D. Should our major classifications of mental disorders be revised? Br J Psychiatry 2010; 196: 255-6.
2. Craddock N, Owen MJ. The Kraepelinian dichotomy - going, going . . . but still not gone. Br J Psychiatry 2010; 196: 92-5.
3. Dikeos DG, Wickham H, McDonald C, Walshe M, Sigmundsson T, Bramon E, et al. Distribution of symptom dimensions across Kraepelinian divisions. Br J Psychiatry 2006; 189: 346-53.
4. Bullmore E, Fletcher P, Jones PB. Why psychiatry can't afford to be neurophobic. Br J Psychiatry 2009; 194: 293-5.
5. Craddock N. Robust empirical data and clinical utility: the only drivers of change. Commentary on . . . The classification of mental disorder. Adv Psychiatr Treat 2010; 16: 20-2.