This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Robert L. Spitzer, MD; Michael B. First, MD
Biometrics Research New York State Psychiatric Institute 722 W 168th St New York, NY 10032

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1990;47(10):980.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.—

In recent years, there have been multiple sets of diagnostic criteria developed (eg, Feighner, RDC, DSM-III, and DSM-III-R) and two more are on the horizon (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, and DSM-IV). Depending on a number of factors (eg, when the study was done, prior experience with the system, and desire for comparability with similar studies), the researcher will choose a diagnostic system to define the study population. Dr Osser correctly points out that the clinician who is only familiar with the current standard system (now DSM-III-R) may have great difficulty in interpreting the results of published studies that use systems with which he or she is not familiar.

There are two solutions to this problem. The first would be for journals to require that all submitted papers use the current official system, or the prior official system if the study had started before the adoption of the current . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?