Classification of Behaviorally Defined Disorders: Biology Versus the DSM

Three levels of investigation underlie all biologically based attempts at classification of behaviorally defined developmental and psychiatric disorders: Level A, pseudo-categorical classification of mostly dimensional descriptions of behaviors and their disorders included in the 2013 American Psych...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of autism and developmental disorders 2014-10, Vol.44 (10), p.2661-2666
1. Verfasser: Rapin, Isabelle
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Three levels of investigation underlie all biologically based attempts at classification of behaviorally defined developmental and psychiatric disorders: Level A, pseudo-categorical classification of mostly dimensional descriptions of behaviors and their disorders included in the 2013 American Psychiatric Association’s Fifth Edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5); Level C, mostly categorical classification of genetic and environmental causes (etiologies) of Level A disorders; and Level B, the pathophysiologic—both categorical and dimensional—biologic mechanisms underlying Level A “diagnoses” which comprise hierarchically interacting molecular, cellular, and neural networks and major brain pathways orchestrated by Level C etiologies. Besides modest numbers of effective psychotropic medications and their derivatives, major advances in treatment have addressed the behavioral symptoms of Level A-defined developmental and psychiatric disorders. The National Institute of Mental Health proposes support for a new biologically based Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) classification; its goal is to apply to behaviorally defined Level A developmental and psychiatric disorders the biologically based Level C and Level B research strategies that have greatly accelerated treatment and prevention of medical disorders. It plans to supplement effective educational and behavioral symptom-based interventions with faster, more potent and specific biologic therapies and, hopefully, to discover how effective behavioral interventions alter brain function. This commentary raises the question of whether a hybrid nosology that maps biology onto behavior is attainable. At a minimum, such a nosologic effort requires greater in-depth and better informed dialog between investigators of behavior and biology than occurs typically, and more realistic communication of the implications of research results to the public.
ISSN:0162-3257
1573-3432
DOI:10.1007/s10803-014-2127-5