clinical psychology Flashcards
(132 cards)
diagnosis definition
involves a clinician assessing a patient, deciding whether they show evidence of a mental disorder, and if so, whether the symptoms match those in the checklist of the features + symptoms of the mental disorder normally listed in the DSM + ICD
Deviance
define
e.g
eval
define: behaviours/emotions that are not in the norm of society
e.g- paedophillia- sexualised thoughts about young children
X- REDUCTIONIST- ignoring how a person feels abt their deviant behaviour… they may enjoy social isolation
X- can change across time (homosexuality)
Dysfunction
define
e.g
eval
define: behaviours that interfere with a person’s everyday life
e.g- being unable to work, insomnia
X- researcher bias + subjectivity - one clinician may diagnose and another wont, decreasing reliability
X- on its own it does not take into account reasons for dysfunction like social isolation due to grief
Distress
define
e.g
eval
define: the extent to which a person perceives their own negative behaviours as upsetting
e.g- crying, panic attacks
X- not a universal feeling felt by all (restricting diet)
X- subjective , decreasing reliability especially cross culturally
Danger
define
e.g
eval
define: refers to danger to others or to the individual themselves
e.g- suicidal thoughts/ self harm
X- subjective: some ppl like to skydive
X- reductionist: how a person feels about their dangerous behaviour
e.g adrenaline junky, enjoys skydiving, form of catharsis
Strengths for 4Ds AO3
+ weakness
all 4 Ds have practical application when diagnosing mental disorders
all 4Ds have internal validity of DSM diagnosis for mental disorders as a ‘checklist criteria’ can be applied when diagnosing
All 4Ds can be measured using quantitative data- objective measure, increasing reliability
Considering all 4Ds might help avoid errors
weakness- 5th D?? Duration = length of time a person has had the symptoms before making a diagnosis
REDUCES CREDIBILITY
DSM-V AO1 (2013)
aims to coincide with the ICD to avoid confusion with having more than 1 universal classification system
-NO LONGER MULTI-AXIAL SYSTEM
(instead there are 3 sections)
1- Introduction and explanation of changes) =guidance on how to use
- Diagnostic codes taken from ICD-9 in attempt to ‘harmonise’ the 2 systems
e.g= Sz, OCD - Emerging measures + models, self assessment by patients, cultural issues
suggestions for new disorders
e.g= internet gaming disorder is not fullt accepted as a clinical disorder
ICD-11 (2019) AO1
used to monitor incidence, prevalence, morbidity
-used by the WHO
-includes ALL illnesses not just mental health disorders
-Sz code = 6A20
DSM vs ICD differences
DSM- Mental health conditions
ICD- All conditions
DSM- 3 sections using ICD-9 codes to harmonise the 2 systems
ICD- 26 categories, section 6 is related to mental health
DSM- US dominated, only in English
ICD- monitors ALL incidence, prevalence + morbidity of disorders
DSM- DSM-5 Field trials were a significant test of reliability and validity
-change in language to attempt to remove stigma
ICD- Regular revisions + updates which remove and newly define disorders
Strengths of DSM
- reflective of social change
-more tolerant ( removed offensive terms) e.g- ‘mental retardation’ = ‘intellectual disability’ - removal of unnecessary diagnosis
Reliability definition
consistency of diagnosis when using classification systems
Inter rater reliability definition
2 of more clinicians in agreement, same diagnosis
intra rater reliability definition
consistency of clinical diagnosis given by the same psychologist at different times
test- retest reliability
focus on DSM field trials, same patient observed separately by 2 psychologists within a specific time period
Summary of the DSM-5 field trials
designed to evaluate TEST- RETEST reliability in US + Canada
The criteria for 23 diagnosis were tested
Each patient was interviewed twice by 2 different clinicians using the DSM-5 criteria
Strengths DSM Reliability AO3
Brown et al- Found good reliability in clinical diagnosis using DSM-4 in 1127 outpatients. Good to Excellent consistency for most of the DSM categories foe generalised anxiety and mood disorders
Stood the test of time- Despite the revisions, it is still one of the most widely used classification systems in mental health
fine-tuned previous diagnosis e.g: ‘Eating Disorder’ became ‘Binge Eating Disorder’, more specific and reliable enabling clinicians to come to a common diagnosis
Cross-Cultural diagnosis-
DSM-5 gets rid on ‘culture bound syndromes’
increased multi-cultural perspectives
makes new conditions known outside the US
e.g ADHD is now recognised in the UK
Weaknesses DSM Reliability AO3
Spitzer et al KAPPA
DSM-5 field trials only show 5/23 diagnosis to be very good (reliability of Sz low as kappa score is 0.46), below 0.6 is concerning
Cooper et al CULTURE
Showed British and American Psychiatrists the same videotaped interview and asked them to make a diagnosis
American= Sz
British = depression
Buckley et al COMORBIDITY
ppl who suffer from 2 or more mental disorders… hard to diagnose just one
Loring et al GENDER BIAS
found that some behaviour is regarded as psychotic in males but not psychotic in females
(gender and cultural bias in diagnosis of Sz… men more likely to be diagnosed)
Stengths ICD Reliability AO3
- Open access, free online
-ALL illnesses
-Diff cultures
-Jakobsen et al: 100 Danish patients with a history of psychosis was assessed + concordance rate of 98% was obtained. High reliability using up to date classification
-Ponizovsky et al: Compared the reliability of the ICD 9 + 10 systems (in 3 diff years)
Positive predictive value (PPV) was used to measure the reliability of diagnosis
reliability increased each year w PPV score
Weakness of ICD Reliability AO3
Nicholls et al
found low agreement with other classification systems like the ICD-10 which showed 36% agreement for eating disorders
-suggests reliability of classification systems is a universal problem and not limited to the DSM
Internal validity definition
The extent to which psychologist are measuring what they intend to measure
e.g- establishing cause and effect between the symptoms and behaviours exhibited by the patient + clinical diagnosis
Predictive validity definition
When the expected result matches the actual result
Concurrent validity definition
When the 2 tests conducted at the same time focusing on the same clinical condition produce the same results
Construct validity definition
How far the constructs (e.g-symptoms) that are being measured, represent the mental diagnosis
Strengths of DSM Validity AO3
-Becks Depression Inventory
measures core symptoms of depression summing up to a depression score
this means that cause and effect can be established between a person’s symptoms and self-report scale so a suitable diagnosis and treatment plans can be made
-Keenan et al: supports predictive validity
results showed good predictive valitity for 134 twins with construct disorders in clinically referred preschool children
results showed 60% of preschoolers diagnosed with CD met the criteria for the same disorder at a follow up
-Robins + Guze:
proposed 5 formal criteria for establishing validity of clinical diagnosis and found ‘good prognosis Sz’ is a diff illness to Sz.
This resulted in the distinction between the 2 listed in DSM-3
-Kendler:
differentiated validators into concurrent (e.g: psychological tests) and predictive (e.g treatment response)
This distinction helped classify Delusional Disorder as separate from Sz