Suppr超能文献

抑郁障碍现行分类面临的挑战与策略:未来诊断标准建议。

Challenges and Strategies for Current Classifications of Depressive Disorders: Proposal for Future Diagnostic Standards.

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Hanyang University Guri Hospital, Guri, Republic of Korea.

Department of Psychiatry, Korea University Ansan Hospital, College of Medicine, Ansan, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Adv Exp Med Biol. 2021;1305:103-116. doi: 10.1007/978-981-33-6044-0_7.

Abstract

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) was revised based on a combination of a categorical and a dimensional approach such that in the DSM, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), depressive disorders have been separated as a distinctive disease entity from bipolar disorders, consistent with the deconstruction of Kraepelinian dualism. Additionally, the diagnostic thresholds of depressive disorders may be reduced due to the addition of "hopelessness" to the subjective descriptors of depressed mood and the removal of the "bereavement exclusion." Manic/hypomanic, psychotic, and anxious symptoms in major depressive disorder (MDD) and other depressive disorders are described using the transdiagnostic specifiers of "with mixed features," "with psychotic features," and "with anxious distress," respectively. Additionally, due to the polythetic and operational characteristics of the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria, the heterogeneity of MDD is inevitable. Thus, 227 different symptom combinations fulfill the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for MDD. This heterogeneity of MDD is criticized in view of the Wittgensteinian analogy of language game. Depression subtypes determined by disturbances in monoamine levels and the severity of the disease have been identified in the literature. According to a review of the Gottesman and Gould criteria, neuroticism, morning cortisol, cortisol awakening response, asymmetry in frontal cortical activity on electroencephalography (EEG), and probabilistic reward learning, among other variables, are evidenced as endophenotypes for depressive disorders. Network analysis has been proposed as a potential method to compliment the limitations of current diagnostic criteria and to explore the pathways between depressive symptoms, as well as to identify novel and interesting relationships between depressive symptoms. Based on the literature on network analysis in this field, no differences in the centrality index of the DSM and non-DSM symptoms were repeatedly present among patients with MDD. Furthermore, MDD and other depressive syndromes include two of the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC), including the Loss construct within the Negative Valence Systems domains and various Reward constructs within the Positive Valence Systems domain.

摘要

《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM-IV)是基于分类和维度方法的结合进行修订的,因此在第五版(DSM-5)中,抑郁症已从双相情感障碍中分离出来,成为一种独特的疾病实体,这与克莱佩林二元论的解构一致。此外,由于在抑郁心境的主观描述中加入了“绝望”,并取消了“丧亲之痛除外”,因此抑郁症的诊断阈值可能会降低。在重度抑郁症(MDD)和其他抑郁症中,躁狂/轻躁狂、精神病性和焦虑症状分别使用“混合特征”、“精神病性特征”和“焦虑困扰”的跨诊断特征来描述。此外,由于 DSM-5 诊断标准的多元性和操作性特征,MDD 的异质性是不可避免的。因此,有 227 种不同的症状组合符合 DSM-5 对 MDD 的诊断标准。鉴于维特根斯坦语言游戏的类比,MDD 的这种异质性受到了批评。文献中已经确定了由单胺水平紊乱和疾病严重程度决定的抑郁症亚型。根据戈特斯曼和古尔德标准的综述,神经质、早晨皮质醇、皮质醇觉醒反应、脑电图(EEG)前皮质活动的不对称性以及概率奖励学习等变量被证明是抑郁症的内表型。网络分析已被提议作为一种潜在的方法,以补充当前诊断标准的局限性,并探索抑郁症状之间的途径,以及识别抑郁症状之间新的有趣关系。基于该领域网络分析的文献,在 MDD 患者中,DSM 和非 DSM 症状的中心性指数没有差异。此外,MDD 和其他抑郁综合征包括两个研究领域标准(RDoC),包括消极价值系统领域内的丧失结构和积极价值系统领域内的各种奖励结构。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验