Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24229007›Full record

ReviewBMC medicine2013

DSM-5: a collection of psychiatrist views on the changes, controversies, and future directions.

Charles B Nemeroff, Daniel Weinberger, Michael Rutter, Harriet L MacMillan, Richard A Bryant, Simon Wessely, Dan J Stein, Carmine M Pariante, Florian Seemüller, Michael Berk and 4 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Targeting presynaptic H3 heteroreceptor in nucleus accumbens to improve anxiety and obsessive-compulsive-like behaviors.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Do DSM classifications help or hinder
drug development?
.Dialogues in clinical neuroscience · 2020
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Issues on the diagnosis and etiopathogenesis of mood disorders: reconsidering DSM-5.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Charles B Nemeroff
Daniel Weinberger
Michael Rutter
Harriet L MacMillan
Richard A Bryant
Simon Wessely
Dan J Stein
Carmine M Pariante
Florian Seemüller
Michael Berk
Gin S Malhi
Martin Preisig
Martin Brüne
Paul Lysaker

Funding

Medical Research Council G108/603
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recent release of the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) by the American Psychiatric Association has led to much debate. For this forum article, we asked BMC Medicine Editorial Board members who are experts in the field of psychiatry to discuss their personal views on how the changes in DSM-5 might affect clinical practice in their specific areas of psychiatric medicine. This article discusses the influence the DSM-5 may have on the diagnosis and treatment of autism, trauma-related and stressor-related disorders, obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, mood disorders (including major depression and bipolar disorders), and schizophrenia spectrum disorders.

Indexed as

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersHumansPsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID24229007
PMCPMC3846446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.