Even with new manuals of mental disorders in development, lists of symptoms that describe psychiatric conditions are already outdated. Checklists are helpful and may even have consistency and statistical validity. They are still less precise than using new technology such as brain scans. The debate over which disorders to include, which symptoms to list, and how to measure psychopathology involves subjective elements. Biomarkers could provide guidance more useful than relying on a single clinician’s opinion. Neuroimaging techniques could identify mental problems more accurately.
fMRI, SPECT, and even MRI scans can be prohibitively expensive in diagnosing psychiatric conditions. Fortunately, EEG measurements have been researched over the course of thousands of studies. This massive amount of data includes results from hundreds of studies on depression alone. A greater degree of biological precision could also reduce skepticism towards psychiatry.
References:
ADHD and autism: differential diagnosis or overlapping traits? A selective review. (Link)
Diagnostic inflation: causes and a suggested cure. (Link)
Does the diagnosis of multiple Axis II disorders have clinical significance? (Link)
DSM-5 further inflates attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. (Link)
DSM-5 reduces the proportion of ednos cases: Evidence from community samples. (Link)
Exploring the proposed DSM-5 criteria in a clinical sample. (Link)
Generalized anxiety disorder: between neglect and an epidemic. (Link)
How does relaxing the algorithm for autism affect DSM-V prevalence rates? (Link)
Hysteria, conversion and functional disorders: a neurological contribution to classification issues. (Link)
Retention or Deletion of Personality Disorder Diagnoses for DSM-5: An Expert Consensus Approach. (Link)
Which DSM-IV personality disorders are most strongly associated with indices of psychosocial morbidity in psychiatric outpatients? (Link)
