Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37318157›Full record

ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2023

Tracing the Roots of Dementia Praecox: Charles Lasègue and his 1852 Essay "Du Délire De Persécutions" (On Persecutory Delusions).

Kenneth S Kendler

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author.

Kenneth S KendlerPsychiatry Department, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 980126, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8689-6570

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While the evolution of our modern concepts of mania and melancholia over the 19th century is relatively well-understood, no such clear narrative exists for the nonaffective psychotic syndromes that culminated in Kraepelin's concept of dementia praecox in 1899. These narratives were relatively distinct in Germany and France. An important milestone in the French literature is the 1852 essay by the alienist and polymath Charles Lasègue which contained the first detailed modern description of a persecutory delusional syndrome. Lasègue was a careful clinical observer who emphasized a symptomatic approach to psychiatric nosology and was less concerned with course and outcome. He details the evolution of persecutory delusions from increasing referential observations of real events, to the resulting anxious confusion and then the emergence of explanatory delusional beliefs. Once formed, these beliefs, he notes, are relatively impervious to correction. Lasègue was unusual for his time in emphasizing a "first-person perspective" on psychotic experiences, and quotes from his patients in his case history, of which he presents 15. Of these, 12 had auditory hallucinations and 4 passivity phenomena. While conceptualized differently than mid-19th century pre-Kraepelinian German writing on delusional syndromes, and unique on its focus on persecutory delusions, Lasègue's important essay shared a common view on the key features of a broad nonaffective delusional-hallucinatory syndrome. It was this syndrome that Kraepelin, over multiple drafts in the first 6 editions of his textbook from 1883 to 1899, was to divide into his mature concepts of paranoia and the paranoid subtype of dementia praecox.

Indexed as

PsychiatrySchizophreniaDelusionsHallucinationsHistory, 19th CenturyHumansParanoid DisordersSyndrome19th centurydementia praecoxhistorylasèguepersecutory delusions

Identifiers

PMID37318157
PMCPMC10483451

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.