Abstract
The initial plans for the DSM-5 revision envisioned a paradigm shift away from traditional diagnostic categories. However, plans for a major move from descriptive to etiologic diagnoses were quickly abandoned as infeasible. Support was much broader for adding dimensional/spectrum constructs to the categorical diagnoses, although this was interpreted in various ways. Delegation of substantial autonomy to work groups with modest central coordination was seen as problematic by some work groups and positively by others. Controversies emerged around the standards for diagnostic change, and the degree to which the same standards should be used across diagnostic groups. The Summit Group was given the final task of trying to forge a consensus among the various review groups. We conclude with thoughts about the difficulty of trying to revise an entire manual all at once and the desirability of developing clear rules for change at the outset of such a diagnostic project.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
