Mothers may be among the best diagnosticians of developmental and behavioral problems in young children. If not for the positive predictive power of the mother's diagnostic ability, few kids would make it to the child and adolescent psychiatrist ('help-seeking') unless they really got into trouble. Mothers can sense that there is something wrong associated with a burden ('impairment') despite their being nao¨ve in the sense of medical diagnostic algorithms, while we, as doctors, with a more reflective and systematic- analytic approach, need to focus on what number, duration and composition of symptoms would lead to a diagnosis ('DSM, ICD'). This distinction of naivety and reflectiveness in diagnostic 'styles' is close to that which Friedrich Schiller made between nao¨ve poets who write spon- taneously and non-self-consciously, and sentimen- tal poets who are reflective and questioning about how and what they write (Pamuk, 2010). Orhan Pamuk, establishing the focus of his Harvard lec- tures on the application of this distinction to novel writing (and inspiring the title of this commentary), notes that the German sentimentalische has a closer meaning to 'reflective' or 'pensive'. Professor Rutter's article is so thought provoking, and so cogent, that it is both tempting and impos- sible to disagree with his points (Rutter, 2011). Each paragraph of Rutter's article deserving in-depth discussion, I will restrict this commentary to impairment, help-seeking and prognosis as parts of diagnosis, and a few points about trichotillomania and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). A separate classification for primary care, as sug- gested in Professor Rutter's article (Rutter, 2011), is definitely an important need in the field of child and adolescent mental health, where there are several layers and levels of services, provided by medical and non-medical disciplines that are differentially sen- sitive to the diagnosable conditions. A prototype approach, somewhat naively utilized, can already be found in non-medical mental health professionals' approach and is useful for purposes of screening and referral. This is what parents may also be doing when they read a newspaper article about autism, find identical symptoms in their child, and seek help. A whole constellation of symptoms is reduced to 'one good reason' (of course, it can be two or three, but not many) at the 'screening' and 'referral'-based pri- mary care systems where the 'real' diagnosis and treatment is provided by the psychiatrist at a 'higher grade' of care. This fast and frugal approach may be necessary for the primary care level. The fast and frugal 'one good reason' approach, which may fit well with primary-care-level diagnostic needs, is based on 'looking up factors in order of importance, stopping the search if a factor allows it, and classifying the object according to this factor' (Gigenzerer, 2007).Thatprocesscan takeplace either in an emergency room setting (which patient with a chest pain should go to the intensive care unit?) or at a school (who should see the child and adolescent psychiatrist?), or at any place where more serious or complex cases should be triaged to receive 'higher' services. The primary care professional, the parents or the patient present the 'case' to the next level to learn whether there is a diagnosis associated with the condition so that it should receive clinical atten- tion.This is different from the comprehensive ('senti- mental') diagnostic process at a higher level of care. A prototype-screening diagnosis carries the hard- to-avoid risk of being rounded up to a 'real' diagno- sis, i.e., overdiagnosis of the condition as requiring clinical attention. For example, in school settings, diagnostic and treatment referrals take place via two main routes. If a prototype diagnosis of ADHD is established upon scoring above the cut-off on a symptom checklist, the possibility of a diagnosis of ADHD is present, and a consequent referral takes
Read full abstract