Friedman in his article in this issue describes the posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnosis according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5) and provides considerable information about the process that resulted in the revisions, as well as how PTSD in the DSM-5 differs from proposals for PTSD in the International Classification of Mental Disorders and Related Health Problems (ICD-11). In this commentary, I argue that (a) the placement of PTSD in the DSM-5 category of Trauma and Stressor-Related Disorders is a major advance because it draws attention to the role of “nurture” when there is an overemphasis on “nature” by some; (b) the broader construct of PTSD in DSM-5 is justified because it includes clinically important problems and can be reliably diagnosed; and (c) the web surveys contributed substantially to the provision of data needed to support proposed changes. Concerns are raised about the proposed ICD-11 approach, and the case is presented that substantial evidence should be required before these proposed changes are made because they differ substantially from a DSM-5 PTSD diagnosis that has demonstrated reliability and validity.

Traditional and Simplified Chinese Abstracts by AsianSTSS

標題 : PTSD : DSM 第五版弄清楚了嗎?

撮要 : 這一期Friedman的文章描述精神疾病診斷及統計手冊第五版(DSM-5;美國精神學會〔APA〕,2013) 中創傷後壓力症(PTSD)的診斷,和提供PTSD在DSM-5內修訂的由來,及PTSD在DSM-5和國際疾病分類(ICD-11)提案的相互差異。本評論指出:(a)PTSD在DSM-5放在「創傷及壓力相關障礙」類別是一個進步,因為除了“天性”方面的影響亦留意到“教養”的角色;(b)PTSD在DSM-5的較寬構築是有必要的,因為包含了臨床重要問題,而且診斷方面更可靠;(c)網絡調查對建議的改變提供充份資料。由於ICD-11建議提案的提議改動對比已證實有可靠性及認可性的 DSM-5 PTSD有着明顯的差異,我們希望能有充份証據支持改動。

标题 : PTSD : DSM 第五版弄清楚了吗?

撮要 : 这一期Friedman的文章描述精神疾病诊断及统计手册第五版(DSM-5;美国精神学会〔APA〕,2013) 中创伤后压力症(PTSD)的诊断,和提供PTSD在DSM-5内修订的始末,及PTSD在DSM-5和国际疾病分类(ICD-11)提案的相互差异。本评论指出:(a)PTSD在DSM-5放在「创伤及压力相关障碍」类别是一个进步,因为除了“天性”方面的影响亦留意到“教养”的角色;(b)PTSD在DSM-5的较宽构筑是有必要的,因为包含了临床重要问题,而且诊断方面更可靠;(c)网络调查对建议的改变提供充份资料。由于ICD-11建议提案的提议改动对比已证实有可靠性及认可性的 DSM-5 PTSD有着明显的差异,我们希望能有充份证据支持改动。