A polydiagnostic study of depressive disorders according to DSM-IV and 23 classical diagnostic systems

Abstract

The classification of mood disorders is one of the most highly debated topics in modern psychiatry. The introduction of DSM-III (and its followers) has set a new standard in this controversy but little empirical evidence is available as to how the various classical diagnostic categories of mood disorders by Kraepelin, Schneider, Leonhard, Hamilton, Kielholz, Winokur and others compare with this new standard. The Intensive Prospective Study arm of the Group for Longitudinal Affective Disorders Study has studied a broad spectrum of mood disorders in 23 participating centres from all over Japan with a polydiagnostic semistructured interview called Comprehensive Assessment List of Affective disorders. In this paper we examined how the various classical diagnostic systems of depressive disorders correspond to the DSM-IV diagnoses, and found the following: (1) The classical 'neurotic' or 'psychogenic' depressions are diagnosed as major depression and not as dysthymia in DSM-IV; although dysthymia was dubbed as 'depressive neurosis' in DSM-III, its criteria were not true to the traditional usage of the term. Viewed from the other side of the coin, DSM-IV can be said to stand in the unitary tradition. (2) Some of the classical diagnostic categories such as Schneider's depressive psychopathy and Klein's acute dysphoria as well as modern ones such as Akiskal's subaffective dysthymia and Angst's recurrent brief depression were rarely seen in traditional psychiatric treatment settings. (3) Comparisons of the unique diagnostic systems such as those by Leonhard, Winokur and Berner warrant further studies on their validity.