Operational criteria application does not change clinicians’ opinion on the diagnosis of mental disorder: a pre- and post-intervention validity study

Author:

Rocha Neto Helio G.,Lessa José Luiz Martins,Koiller Luisa Mendez,Pereira Amanda Machado,Gomes Bianca Marques de Souza,Veloso Filho Carlos Linhares,Casado Telleria Carlos Henrique,Cavalcanti Maria T.,Telles-Correia Diogo

Abstract

ObjectiveOur objective was to check if the ICD-10 operational criteria application changes non-operational, prototype-based diagnoses obtained in a real-life scenario.MethodsPsychiatry residents applied the diagnostic criteria of the ICD-10 as a “diagnostic test” to five outpatient patients they were already following who had a prototype-based diagnosis. Tests were used to ascertain whether changes in opinion were significant and if any of the diagnostic groups were more prone to change than others. The present paper is part of the study with UTN U1111-1260-1212.ResultsSeventeen residents reviewed their last five case files, retrieving 85 diagnostic pairs of non-operational-based vs. operational-based diagnoses. The Stuart–Maxwell test did not indicate a significant opinion change (χ2 = 5.25, p = 0.39; power = 0.94) besides 30% of diagnostic changes. Despite not being statistically significant, 20.2% of all evaluations resulted in a change that would affect treatment choices. Using ICD-10 operational criteria slightly increased the number of observed diagnoses, but probably without clinical relevance. None of the non-operational diagnoses have a higher tendency to change with operational criteria application (χ2 = 11.6, p = 0.07). The female gender was associated with a higher diagnostic change tendency.ConclusionApplying ICD-10 operational criteria as a diagnostic test does not induce a statistically significant diagnostic opinion change in residents and no diagnostic group seems more sensible to diagnostic change. Gender-related differences in diagnostic opinion changes might be evidence of sunk cost bias. Although not statistically significant, using operational criteria after diagnostic elaboration might help to deal with subjects without adequate treatment response.

Publisher

Frontiers Media SA

Reference35 articles.

1. The concept of validity throughout the history of psychiatry;Telles Correia;J Eval Clin Pract,2017

2. Diagnostic errors and the bedside clinical examination;Clark;Med Clin North Am,2018

3. Point/counterpoint: The reliability of psychiatric diagnosis;Aboraya;Psychiatry,2007

4. Questionable agreement: the experience of depression and DSM-5 major depressive disorder criteria;Nussbaum;J Med Philos,2020

5. The myth of mental illness;Szasz;Am Psychol,1960

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3