Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36227452›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of bipolar disorders2022

Clinical research diagnostic criteria for bipolar illness (CRDC-BP): rationale and validity.

S Nassir Ghaemi, Jules Angst, Paul A Vohringer, Eric A Youngstrom, James Phelps, Philip B Mitchell, Roger S McIntyre, Michael Bauer, Eduard Vieta, Samuel Gershon

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of bipolar disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Lifetime Prevalence of Recurrent and Persistent Depression: A Scoping Review of Epidemiological Studies.Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. A compelling need to empirically validate bipolar depression.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2023
    Article
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

10 authors.

S Nassir GhaemiDepartment of Psychiatry, Tufts University, 800 Washington St, Boston, MA, 02111, USA. Nassir.ghaemi@tufts.edu.
Jules AngstZurich University, Zurich, Switzerland.
Paul A VohringerDepartment of Psychiatry, Tufts University, 800 Washington St, Boston, MA, 02111, USA.
Eric A YoungstromDepartments of Psychology, Neuroscience, and Psychiatry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
James PhelpsDepartment of Psychiatry, Good Samaritan Regional Medical Center, Corvallis, OR, USA.
Philip B MitchellDiscipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Roger S McIntyreDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Michael BauerDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Carl Gustav Carus University Hospital, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Eduard VietaDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychology, Hospital Clinic, Institute of Neuroscience, University of Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBERSAM, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
Samuel GershonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Miami, Miami, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the 1970 s, scientific research on psychiatric nosology was summarized in Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC), based solely on empirical data, an important source for the third revision of the official nomenclature of the American Psychiatric Association in 1980, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Third Edition (DSM-III). The intervening years, especially with the fourth edition in 1994, saw a shift to a more overtly "pragmatic" approach to diagnostic definitions, which were constructed for many purposes, with research evidence being only one consideration. The latest editions have been criticized as failing to be useful for research. Biological and clinical research rests on the validity of diagnostic definitions that are supported by firm empirical foundations, but critics note that DSM criteria have failed to prioritize research data in favor of "pragmatic" considerations.

resultsBased on prior work of the International Society for Bipolar Diagnostic Guidelines Task Force, we propose here Clinical Research Diagnostic Criteria for Bipolar Illness (CRDC-BP) for use in research studies, with the hope that these criteria may lead to further refinement of diagnostic definitions for other major mental illnesses in the future. New proposals are provided for mixed states, mood temperaments, and duration of episodes.

conclusionsA new CRDC could provide guidance toward an empirically-based, scientific psychiatric nosology, and provide an alternative clinical diagnostic approach to the DSM system.

Indexed as

Bipolar disorderClassificationCRDCDiagnosisDSMNosologyRDC

Identifiers

PMID36227452
PMCPMC9561456

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.