Basic nomenclature issues for DSM-V.

By B. Rounsaville, R. Alarcón, G. Andrews, J. Jackson, R. Kendell, Kenneth S. Kendler. 2002

149 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d80f6aa86caf77c1c47be3f35b9295c0ffbdcb64

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. D. Samuel
2. T. Widiger
3. Timothy Trull
4. J. Skeem
5. E. Simonsen
6. DavidJ. Cooke
7. C. Durrett
8. Robert Krueger

Citations in the corpus

• Diagnostic categories or dimensions? A question for the Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders--fifth edition. (2005, background): “(Rounsaville et al., 2002, p. 12) The modern effort to demarcate a taxonomy of distinct clinical conditions is often traced to Kraepelin (1917), but Kraepelin had himself acknowledged that “wherever we try to mark out the frontier between mental health and disease, we find a neutral territory, in…”
• Plate tectonics in the classification of personality disorder: shifting to a dimensional model. (2007, background): “Kupfer et al. (2002) and Rounsaville et al. (2002) lamented the failure of studies to support the validity of distinct diagnostic entities for the mood, anxiety, schizophrenia, substance use, and other classes of psychopathology.”
• Categorical and dimensional models of personality disorder. (2005, background): “…and the National Institute of Mental Health reviewed and evaluated many of the most pressing issues for DSM-V and concluded that “there is a clear need for dimensional models to be developed and for their utility to be compared with that of existing typologies” (Rounsaville et al. 2002, p. 13).”
• Is criminal behavior a central component of psychopathy? Conceptual directions for resolving the debate. (2010, background): “Nevertheless, these frameworks have illustrative utility: They provide direction for defining a hierarchy of validators for diagnostic criteria (Rounsaville et al., 2002) and specify a biomedical hierarchy that happens to be consistent with several theories of psychopathy.”
• Alternative dimensional models of personality disorder: finding a common ground. (2005, background): “…limitations of the categorical model of personality disorder classification are well recognized (Clark, Livesley, & Morey, 1997; Cloninger, 2000; First et al., 2002; Livesley, 2003; Rounsaville et al., 2002; Oldham & Skodol, 2000; Trull & Durrett, in press; Tyrer, 2001; Widiger & Samuel, in press).”