作为对话的诊断:历史和当前的观点
。

IF 8.3 2区 医学 Q1 Medicine
Paul Hoff, Anke Maatz, Johannes Simon Vetter
{"title":"作为对话的诊断:历史和当前的观点\u2029。","authors":"Paul Hoff,&nbsp;Anke Maatz,&nbsp;Johannes Simon Vetter","doi":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/phoff","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ever since psychiatry emerged as a clinical discipline and field of scientific inquiry in the late 18th century, debates about diagnosis have been at its very heart. Considered by many a requirement for clinical communication as well as for systematic study, others have critiqued psychiatric diagnosis for being modeled on a medical conception of disease that is ill-suited to the specific nature of mental disorders. Based on a review of seminal positions in the conceptual history of psychiatry and an examination of their epistemological underpinnings, we propose to consider diagnosis as dialogue. Such understanding, we argue, can serve as a meta-framework that provides a conceptual and practical umbrella to encourage open-minded conversation across the diverse conceptual and experiential frameworks that are characteristic of psychiatry. In this perspective psychopathology will also reinforce the interpersonal realm as a necessary element of any clinical encounter, be it diagnostic in purpose or otherwise. Current challenges to traditional diagnostic systems like Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) and Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) are discussed in light of these considerations.\u2029.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"22 1","pages":"27-35"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/8d/ba/DialoguesClinNeurosci-22-27.PMC7365291.pdf","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnosis as dialogue: historical and current perspectives\\u2029.\",\"authors\":\"Paul Hoff,&nbsp;Anke Maatz,&nbsp;Johannes Simon Vetter\",\"doi\":\"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/phoff\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Ever since psychiatry emerged as a clinical discipline and field of scientific inquiry in the late 18th century, debates about diagnosis have been at its very heart. Considered by many a requirement for clinical communication as well as for systematic study, others have critiqued psychiatric diagnosis for being modeled on a medical conception of disease that is ill-suited to the specific nature of mental disorders. Based on a review of seminal positions in the conceptual history of psychiatry and an examination of their epistemological underpinnings, we propose to consider diagnosis as dialogue. Such understanding, we argue, can serve as a meta-framework that provides a conceptual and practical umbrella to encourage open-minded conversation across the diverse conceptual and experiential frameworks that are characteristic of psychiatry. In this perspective psychopathology will also reinforce the interpersonal realm as a necessary element of any clinical encounter, be it diagnostic in purpose or otherwise. Current challenges to traditional diagnostic systems like Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) and Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) are discussed in light of these considerations.\\u2029.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54343,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"27-35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/8d/ba/DialoguesClinNeurosci-22-27.PMC7365291.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/phoff\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/phoff","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

自从精神病学在18世纪后期成为一门临床学科和科学探究领域以来,关于诊断的争论一直是其核心。许多人认为这是临床交流和系统研究的需要,其他人则批评精神病学诊断以疾病的医学概念为模型,不适合精神障碍的具体性质。基于对精神病学概念史上开创性地位的回顾和对其认识论基础的考察,我们建议将诊断视为对话。我们认为,这样的理解可以作为一个元框架,提供一个概念和实践的保护伞,以鼓励精神病学特征的各种概念和经验框架之间的开放对话。从这个角度来看,精神病理学也将加强人际关系领域,作为任何临床接触的必要元素,无论是有目的的诊断还是其他目的。目前传统的诊断系统,如研究领域标准(RDoC)和精神病理学层次分类法(HiTOP)面临的挑战是根据这些考虑来讨论的。
。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Diagnosis as dialogue: historical and current perspectives
.

Diagnosis as dialogue: historical and current perspectives
.

Diagnosis as dialogue: historical and current perspectives
.

Ever since psychiatry emerged as a clinical discipline and field of scientific inquiry in the late 18th century, debates about diagnosis have been at its very heart. Considered by many a requirement for clinical communication as well as for systematic study, others have critiqued psychiatric diagnosis for being modeled on a medical conception of disease that is ill-suited to the specific nature of mental disorders. Based on a review of seminal positions in the conceptual history of psychiatry and an examination of their epistemological underpinnings, we propose to consider diagnosis as dialogue. Such understanding, we argue, can serve as a meta-framework that provides a conceptual and practical umbrella to encourage open-minded conversation across the diverse conceptual and experiential frameworks that are characteristic of psychiatry. In this perspective psychopathology will also reinforce the interpersonal realm as a necessary element of any clinical encounter, be it diagnostic in purpose or otherwise. Current challenges to traditional diagnostic systems like Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) and Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) are discussed in light of these considerations.
.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience
Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
19.30
自引率
1.20%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience (DCNS) endeavors to bridge the gap between clinical neuropsychiatry and the neurosciences by offering state-of-the-art information and original insights into pertinent clinical, biological, and therapeutic aspects. As an open access journal, DCNS ensures accessibility to its content for all interested parties. Each issue is curated to include expert reviews, original articles, and brief reports, carefully selected to offer a comprehensive understanding of the evolving landscape in clinical neuroscience. Join us in advancing knowledge and fostering dialogue in this dynamic field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信