Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36704731›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022

ADHD in the DSM-5-TR: What has changed and what has not.

Athanasios Koutsoklenis, Juho Honkasilta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Genetic insights into the effect of Metformin on psychiatry disorders.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Athanasios KoutsoklenisDepartment of Primary Education, Democritus University of Thrace, Alexandroupolis, Greece.
Juho HonkasiltaFaculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this article, we critically review the changes made to the DSM-5 Text Revision published in 2022 regarding the diagnostic entity of Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). We structure our critique around three points. The first discusses the acknowledgment of ADHD as a neurodevelopmental disorder. The second examines the definition of ADHD provided in the updated edition of the manual. The third scrutinizes the changes in the diagnostic criteria for ADHD and assesses whether these changes make the diagnosis more accurate. We conclude that DSM's latest edition does not escape the logical and scientific pitfalls of its predecessor. DSM-5-TR keeps the faith in the neo-Kraepelinian paradigm by explicitly and implicitly cultivating the essentialist medical scientific metaphor of disorder, creating the illusion that it represents scientific progress that validates ADHD as a neurodevelopmental disorder.

Indexed as

ADHDAmerican Psychiatric Associationdiagnosisdiagnostic manualDSM-5-TRrevisions

Identifiers

PMID36704731
PMCPMC9871920

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.