A 50 años de la exclusión de la homosexualidad del Manual diagnóstico y estadístico de los trastornos mentales (DSM) / 50 years after the exclusion of homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)

RESUMEN Se cumple medio siglo del hecho histórico constituido por la remoción de la homosexualidad como ítem diagnóstico en la clasificación norteamericana de trastornos psiquiátricos, es decir, en el Manual diagnóstico y estadístico de los trastornos mentales (DSM). Aunque es un período breve, cuesta trabajo creer que, hasta hace 50 años, las personas homosexuales carecían de numerosos derechos civiles elementales en EE. UU. y que diversas leyes penalizaban actos sexuales privados y libremente consentidos entre adultos. Rememorar estos hechos significativos en el contexto de una acotada reseña de la historia conceptual de la homosexualidad como trasfondo es el objetivo fundamental de este artículo que, a la vez, constituye un recordatorio de muchas tareas pendientes en la salud mental y derechos humanos de las minorías sexuales, todavía víctimas de homofobia, estigma y segregación, más aún en países como el nuestro.

ABSTRACT It is half a century since the historical event constituted by the removal of homosexuality as a psychiatric diagnosis from the North American Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Although it is a short period of time, it is hard to believe that fifty years ago, homosexual people lacked many basic civil rights in the United States and various laws criminalized private, freely consented sexual acts between adults. Recalling these significant events in the context of a summarized conceptual history of homosexuality is the main objective of this brief account which, at the same time, can serve as a reminder of many tasks pending in the mental health and human rights of sexual minorities, still victims of homophobia, stigma, and segregation, even more so in countries like Peru.

Advancements in Understanding and Classifying Chronic Orofacial Pain: Key Insights from Biopsychosocial Models and International Classifications (ICHD-3, ICD-11, ICOP).

In exploring chronic orofacial pain (COFP), this review highlights its global impact on life quality and critiques current diagnostic systems, including the ICD-11, ICOP, and ICHD-3, for their limitations in addressing COFP's complexity. Firstly, this study outlines the global burden of chronic pain and the importance of distinguishing between different pain types for effective treatment. It then delves into the specific challenges of diagnosing COFP, emphasizing the need for a more nuanced approach that incorporates the biopsychosocial model. This review critically examines existing classification systems, highlighting their limitations in fully capturing COFP's multifaceted nature. It advocates for the integration of these systems with the DSM-5's Somatic Symptom Disorder code, proposing a unified, multidisciplinary diagnostic approach. This recommendation aims to improve chronic pain coding standardization and acknowledge the complex interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors in COFP. In conclusion, here, we highlight the need for a comprehensive, universally applicable classification system for COFP. Such a system would enable accurate diagnosis, streamline treatment strategies, and enhance communication among healthcare professionals. This advancement holds potential for significant contributions to research and patient care in this challenging field, offering a broader perspective for scientists across disciplines.

The (Un)real Existence of ADHD-Criteria, Functions, and Forms of the Diagnostic Entity.

The contemporary conceptualization of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) as a complex, multifactorial neurodevelopmental disorder cannot be understood as such without a complex assemblage of political, economic, and cultural processes that deem the conceptualization to be valuable and useful. In this article we use the notion of psychiatrization as a lens through which to see parts of these processes that make up ADHD what it is. In the first part of the article, we critically assess the scientific basis of the ADHD diagnosis via examining its diagnostic criteria as presented in the current fifth edition of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the so called "Bible" of modern psychiatry. The second part of the article asks what is done with the ADHD diagnostic entity and with the idea that it represents a natural neurodevelopmental state within an individual-something an individual has-as represented in the DSM-5. Drawn from our previous research, we analyze how ADHD becomes real in discourse practice as a powerful semiotic mediator through analysis of the various functions and forms in which it takes shape in institutional, social, and individual levels. We conclude that the frequent changes in the diagnostic criteria of ADHD do not reflect any real scientific progress. Among other reasons, they change to match better the maneuvers of individuals when navigating an increasingly psychiatrized society in the search for recognition, support, category membership, immunity, sympathy, and sense of belonging.

Why Mental Illness Diagnoses Are Wrong: A Pilot Study on the Perspectives of the Public.

Background: Mental illness diagnostic criteria are made based on assumptions. This pilot study aims to assess the public's perspectives on mental illness diagnoses and these assumptions. Methods: An anonymous survey with 30 questions was made available online in 2021. Participants were recruited via social media, and no personal information was collected. Ten questions focused on participants' perceptions regarding mental illness diagnoses, and 20 questions related to the assumptions of mental illness diagnoses. The participants' perspectives on these assumptions held by professionals were assessed. Results: Among 14 survey participants, 4 correctly answered the relationships of 6 symptom pairs (28.57%). Two participants could not correctly conduct the calculations involved in mood disorder diagnoses (14.29%). Eleven (78.57%) correctly indicated that 2 or more sets of criteria were available for single diagnoses of mental illnesses. Only 1 (7.14%) correctly answered that the associations between symptoms and diagnoses were supported by including symptoms in the diagnostic criteria of the diagnoses. Nine (64.29%) correctly answered that the diagnosis variances were not fully explained by their symptoms. The confidence of participants in the major depressive disorder diagnosis and the willingness to take medications for this diagnosis were the same (mean = 5.50, standard deviation [SD] = 2.31). However, the confidence of participants in the symptom-based diagnosis of non-solid brain tumor was significantly lower (mean = 1.62, SD = 2.33, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Our study found that mental illness diagnoses are wrong from the perspectives of the public because our participants did not agree with all the assumptions professionals make about mental illness diagnoses. Only a minority of our participants obtained correct answers to the calculations involved in mental illness diagnoses. In the literature, neither patients nor the public have been engaged in formulating the diagnostic criteria of mental illnesses.

Significant Improvement of Somatic Symptom Disorder With Brief Psychoeducational Intervention by PMHNP in Primary Care.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with somatic symptom disorders (SSD) are prevalent in primary care, urgent care, and emergency rooms and present with reduced quality of life, increased disability, and suicidality . Criteria for SSD include (1) somatic symptoms that cause distress and disrupt life; (2) concurrent physical illness with thoughts and feelings that are disproportionate to the seriousness of the illness; and (3) distress which is persistent and causes suffering. The frequency of SSD in the general population is 5% to 7%; however, in primary care, it is 5% to 35% . Because patients present with anxiety, depression, and/or pain, providers are flummoxed when diagnostic findings do not match symptom intensity. The purpose of this project was to provide an intervention for patients with SSD and measure its effectiveness on their somatic symptoms. METHOD: This study provided a single-session, 30-minute psychoeducational intervention for patients to explain brain pathways for pain and the body's response to stress, including scientific benefits of exercise and healthy diet. Patients were asked questions using the motivational interviewing technique OARS (open-ended question, affirmation, reflection, summary) and were encouraged to talk about their concerns. The study used a pre- and post-intervention visual analogue scale and a self-reported Patient Health Questionnaire-15 both before and 3 weeks post-intervention. RESULTS: Measurements showed significant symptom improvement immediately after the intervention with sustained improvement 3 weeks post-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This intervention demonstrates an effective treatment for this insidious illness, which plagues up to 35% of patients in primary care.

The Quest for Psychiatric Advancement through Theory, beyond Serendipity.

Over the past century, advancements in psychiatric treatments have freed countless individuals from the burden of life-long, incapacitating mental illness. These treatments have largely been discovered by chance. Theory has driven advancement in the natural sciences and other branches of medicine, but psychiatry remains a field in its "infancy". The targets for healing in psychiatry lie within the realm of the mind's subjective experience and thought, which we cannot yet describe in terms of their biological underpinnings in the brain. Our technology is sufficiently advanced to study brain neurons and their interactions on an electrophysiological and molecular level, but we cannot say how these form a single feeling or thought. While psychiatry waits for its "Copernican Revolution", we continue the work in developing theories and associated experiments based on our existing diagnostic systems, for example, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), International Classification of Diseases (ICD), or the more newly introduced Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework. Understanding the subjective reality of the mind in biological terms would doubtless lead to huge advances in psychiatry, as well as to ethical dilemmas, from which we are spared for the time being.

The Power of Perception: Lived Experiences with Diagnostic Labeling in Mental Health Recovery without Ongoing Medication Use.

The recovery movement in mental health emphasizes holistic and individualized treatment through many pathways to recovery, though the majority of mental health treatment and existing literature emphasize pharmacotherapy and medication adherence for major mental health conditions. The reimbursement system and research literature are oriented around formal diagnostic categories based in a biomedical perspective of mental health problems, but diagnostic labels also carry stigma and influence how clients perceive themselves and their mental health problems. To investigate the influence of labeling and perception in alternate pathways to recovery, this qualitative study explores the lived experience of diagnostic labeling and self-perception among persons in sustained recovery without ongoing medication use. The study used a grounded theory approach to analyze data from in-depth interviews with 19 participants. Participants had previously received diagnoses of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and/or major depression, met criteria for functional recovery, and were no longer taking psychotropic medications for 12 months. The participants identified positive perceptions-externalization of the problem and hope for an external "cure"-and negative perceptions-stigma and powerlessness-following a diagnostic label. Notably, the theme of powerlessness related to the initially positive themes as the diagnosis placed the problem outside their control and some participants experienced treatments as unhelpful. Participants succeeded in overcoming powerlessness by finding internalized solutions and redefining their mental health experience as transformative. Rather than pressing clients to accept their diagnosis or "illness," mental health providers can support multiple pathways to recovery by emphasizing empowerment and personal meaning-making in the recovery process.

Gaming addiction, problematic gaming and engaged gaming - Prevalence and associated characteristics.

INTRODUCTION: Gaming disorder was included in the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD 11) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) included Internet Gaming Disorder as a tentative diagnosis. Most scholars agree upon the potential risk for pathological use of video games. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of engaged gamers, problem gamers and addicted gamers. The secondary aim was to describe these groups in terms of gender, age, social satisfaction, psychological wellbeing and hours spent chatting on internet/social media. METHODS: We used survey-based data for this population-based research. The data was collected online in two different settings in 2017. In total 2075 participants were included. RESULTS: 4.5 percent met the criteria for highly engaged gaming, 5.3 percent were shown to be problem gamers and 1.2 percent met the cut off for game addiction. Young age, hours chatting on internet/social media, experiencing loneliness and considering seeking treatment for psychological distress were associated with both engaged, problematic and addictive gaming. Male gender was associated to problematic and addictive gaming. Hours spent chatting showed a greater correlation to problem/addictive gaming than to engaged gaming. CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that both highly engaged gamers, problem gamers and addicted gamers all experience loneliness and psychological distress to a greater extent than the remaining study participants. This adds to the knowledge of prevalence and features of gaming disorder. Additionally, preferably longitudinal research is needed in order to understand causality.

Description and classification of neurodevelopmental disabilities.

Classification is a tool for communication so that when clinicians, policy-makers, or researchers refer to some features they talk about the same thing. The classification of neurodevelopmental problems in children and adolescents is crucial to better understand their prevalence and the intervention or treatment that should be provided. However, such classification might be challenging, especially when development aspects have to be taken into account. This chapter aims to provide a better understanding of the classification of neurodevelopmental disabilities. Thus, we provide an overview of the different classification systems that are the most commonly used, such as the well-known Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, we address opportunities and challenges inherent to the classification of neurodevelopmental disorders and the implications for clinical practice and research areas.

Cultural Context in DSM Diagnosis: An American Indian Case Illustration of Contradictory Trends.

Recent revisions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) increasingly acknowledge the importance of cultural context for the diagnosis of mental illness. However, these same revisions include evolving diagnostic criteria that simultaneously decontextualize particular disorders such as Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). As a result, the DSM reflects a contradictory role for context in psychiatric diagnosis. The case analysis presented here frames the consequences of this contradictory trend for an American Indian woman with a history of DSM-IV MDD and PTSD, whose diagnostic portrait is substantively altered in light of more recent DSM-5 criteria. Specifically, consideration of this respondent's bereavement-related illness experience suggests that a sociocentric cultural frame of reference, which places high value on interdependent personal relationships, is not well-captured by DSM-5's revised MDD or PTSD criteria, or the newly proposed categories of traumatic bereavement or Persistent Complex Bereavement Disorder. The respondent's illness experience argues for greater recognition of this contradictory diagnostic trend, suggesting a need for future resolution of this tension toward more valid diagnosis for culturally diverse populations.