Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28642983›Full record

ReviewDer Nervenarzt2018

[Hebephrenia - a viable psychopathological construct?]

M Jäger, T Becker, M E Wigand

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

M JägerKlinik für Psychiatrie, Psychotherapie und Psychosomatik, Bezirkskrankenhaus Kempten, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus, Universität Ulm, Robert-Weixler-Str. 46, 87439, Kempten, Deutschland. Markus.Jaeger@bkh-kempten.de.
T BeckerKlinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie II, Universität Ulm, Günzburg, Deutschland.
M E WigandKlinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie II, Universität Ulm, Günzburg, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ewald Hecker was the first psychiatrist to describe the disease entity of hebephrenia in some detail, focusing mainly on disturbances of affect. Later Emil Kraepelin and Eugen Bleuler saw hebephrenia as a subtype of dementia praecox or schizophrenia. Willy Mayer-Gross and Karl Leonhard characterized hebephrenia with highly differentiated psychopathological descriptions, whereas this construct only played a minor role in the works of Klaus Conrad and Kurt Schneider. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) lists hebephrenia as a subtype of schizophrenia but in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) no subtypes of schizophrenia are mentioned and the concept of hebephrenia is thus lost. Hebephrenia can be seen as an ideal type describing a psychopathological course pattern. This construct can be useful to conceptualize a group of disorders of affect which otherwise escape description, especially since these psychopathological alterations of affect are difficult to operationalize. To have a viable concept of these disorders is relevant for the prognosis and therapy planning. If the concept of hebephrenia is abolished, important psychopathological knowledge might be lost for future generations of psychiatrists.

Indexed as

Affective SymptomsDiagnosis, DifferentialDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersInternational Classification of DiseasesPrognosisPsychological TheoryPsychopathologySchizophrenia, DisorganizedCourseDiagnosisPsychopathologySchizophreniaTherapy planning

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.