Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Oct;10(3):181-6.
doi: 10.1002/j.2051-5545.2011.tb00046.x.

Broadening the diagnosis of bipolar disorder: benefits vs. risks

Stephen M Strakowski  1 , David E Fleck, Mario Maj
Affiliations

Broadening the diagnosis of bipolar disorder: benefits vs. risks

Stephen M Strakowski et al. World Psychiatry. 2011 Oct.

Abstract

There is considerable debate over whether bipolar and related disorders that share common signs and symptoms, but are currently defined as distinct clinical entities in DSM-IV and ICD-10, may be better characterized as falling within a more broadly defined "bipolar spectrum". With a spectrum view in mind, the possibility of broadening the diagnosis of bipolar disorder has been proposed. This paper discusses some of the rationale for an expanded diagnostic scheme from both clinical and research perspectives in light of potential drawbacks. The ultimate goal of broadening the diagnosis of bipolar disorder is to help identify a common etiopathogenesis for these conditions to better guide treatment. To help achieve this goal, bipolar researchers have increasingly expanded their patient populations to identify objective biological or endophenotypic markers that transcend phenomenological observation. Although this approach has and will likely continue to produce beneficial results, the upcoming DSM-IV and ICD-10 revisions will place increasing scrutiny on psychiatry's diagnostic classification systems and pressure to re-evaluate our conceptions of bipolar disorder. However, until research findings can provide consistent and converging evidence as to the validity of a broader diagnostic conception, clinical expansion to a dimensional bipolar spectrum should be considered with caution.

Keywords: Bipolar I disorder; bipolar II disorder; bipolar spectrum; depression; diagnosis; hypomania; mania.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Phelps J, Angst J, Katzow J. Validity and utility of bipolar spectrum models. Bipolar Disord. 2008;10:179–193. - PubMed
    1. Narrow WE, Rae DS, Robins LN. Revised prevalence estimates of mental disorders in the United States: using a clinical significance criterion to reconcile 2 surveys’ estimates. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2002;59:115–123. - PubMed
    1. Judd LL, Akiskal HS. The prevalence and disability of bipolar spectrum disorders in the US population: re-analysis of the ECA database taking into account subthreshold cases. J Affect Disord. 2003;73:123–131. - PubMed
    1. Hirschfeld RM, Holzer C, Calabrese JR. Validity of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire: a general population study. Am J Psychiatry. 2003;160:178–180. - PubMed
    1. Zimmerman M, Galione JN, Chelminski I. Psychiatric diagnoses in patients who screen positive on the Mood Disorder Questionnaire: implications for using the scale as a case-finding instrument for bipolar disorder. Psychiatry Res. in press. - PubMed