Institute of Psychiatry, King's College, London, UK.
Psychol Med. 2009 Dec;39(12):2043-59. doi: 10.1017/S0033291709990298. Epub 2009 Oct 1.
The extant major psychiatric classifications DSM-IV, and ICD-10, are atheoretical and largely descriptive. Although this achieves good reliability, the validity of a medical diagnosis would be greatly enhanced by an understanding of risk factors and clinical manifestations. In an effort to group mental disorders on the basis of aetiology, five clusters have been proposed. This paper considers the validity of the fourth cluster, emotional disorders, within that proposal.
We reviewed the literature in relation to 11 validating criteria proposed by a Study Group of the DSM-V Task Force, as applied to the cluster of emotional disorders.
An emotional cluster of disorders identified using the 11 validators is feasible. Negative affectivity is the defining feature of the emotional cluster. Although there are differences between disorders in the remaining validating criteria, there are similarities that support the feasibility of an emotional cluster. Strong intra-cluster co-morbidity may reflect the action of common risk factors and also shared higher-order symptom dimensions in these emotional disorders.
Emotional disorders meet many of the salient criteria proposed by the Study Group of the DSM-V Task Force to suggest a classification cluster.
现有的主要精神病学分类 DSM-IV 和 ICD-10 是无理论的，主要是描述性的。虽然这达到了很好的可靠性，但如果能了解风险因素和临床表现，医学诊断的有效性将大大提高。为了根据病因对精神障碍进行分组，已经提出了五个聚类。本文考虑了该提议中第四个聚类，情感障碍的有效性。
我们回顾了与 DSM-V 工作组研究小组提出的 11 个验证标准相关的文献，这些标准适用于情感障碍聚类。
使用 11 个验证器识别的情感障碍聚类是可行的。负性情感是情感聚类的定义特征。尽管在其余验证标准中存在障碍，但存在相似之处，支持情感聚类的可行性。强烈的聚类内共病可能反映了共同风险因素的作用，以及这些情感障碍中共同的高阶症状维度。
情感障碍符合 DSM-V 工作组研究小组提出的许多突出标准，表明存在分类聚类。
