No Cover Image

Journal article 111 views 6 downloads

Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses

Edwin Burns Orcid Logo

Behavior Research Methods

Swansea University Author: Edwin Burns Orcid Logo

DOI (Published version): 10.3758/s13428-024-02459-4

Abstract

The Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (DSM-5) approach to neurocognitive disorders recommends diagnosing cognitive impairment when a patient scores beyond -1 SD below neurotypical norms on two cognitive tests. I review how this approach will fail due to cognitive tests’ p...

Full description

Published in: Behavior Research Methods
Published: 2024
URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa66634
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2024-06-10T08:23:25Z
last_indexed 2024-06-10T08:23:25Z
id cronfa66634
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rfc1807 xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>66634</id><entry>2024-06-10</entry><title>Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>fd2ee0c494abf5744c49ab6dd1f034bc</sid><ORCID>0000-0002-5938-5457</ORCID><firstname>Edwin</firstname><surname>Burns</surname><name>Edwin Burns</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2024-06-10</date><deptcode>PSYS</deptcode><abstract>The Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (DSM-5) approach to neurocognitive disorders recommends diagnosing cognitive impairment when a patient scores beyond -1 SD below neurotypical norms on two cognitive tests. I review how this approach will fail due to cognitive tests’ power limitations, validity issues, imperfect reliabilities, and biases, before summarising their resulting negative consequences. As a proof of concept, I use developmental prosopagnosia, a condition characterised by difficulties recognising faces, to show the DSM-5 only diagnoses 62-70% (n1 = 61, n2 = 165) versus 100% (n1 = 61) through symptoms alone. Pooling the DSM-5 missed cases confirmed the presence of group-level impairments on objective tests, which were further evidenced through meta-analyses, thus validating their highly atypical symptoms. These findings support a paradigm shift towards bespoke diagnostic approaches for distinct cognitive impairments, including a symptom-based method when validated effective. I reject dogmatic adherence to the DSM-5 approach to neurocognitive disorders, and underscore the importance of a data driven, transdiagnostic approach to understanding patients’ subjective cognitive impairments. This will ultimately benefit patients, their families, clinicians, and scientific progress.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Behavior Research Methods</journal><volume/><journalNumber/><paginationStart/><paginationEnd/><publisher/><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint/><issnElectronic/><keywords/><publishedDay>8</publishedDay><publishedMonth>7</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2024</publishedYear><publishedDate>2024-07-08</publishedDate><doi>10.3758/s13428-024-02459-4</doi><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Psychology School</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>PSYS</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm>SU Library paid the OA fee (TA Institutional Deal)</apcterm><funders>Swansea University</funders><projectreference/><lastEdited>2024-07-08T21:31:43.5207203</lastEdited><Created>2024-06-10T09:17:12.7479859</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences</level><level id="2">School of Psychology</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Edwin</firstname><surname>Burns</surname><orcid>0000-0002-5938-5457</orcid><order>1</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>66634__30642__b1924b7548b94ad0ade1c766cca40159.pdf</filename><originalFilename>DSM5LimitationsDPEmailtoBRM (1).pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2024-06-13T22:55:54.0032661</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>1081006</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Accepted Manuscript</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><copyrightCorrect>false</copyrightCorrect></document></documents><OutputDurs><OutputDur><Id>253</Id><IsDataAvailableOnline>true</IsDataAvailableOnline><DataNotAvailableOnlineReasonId xsi:nil="true"/><DurUrl>https://osf.io/3x86n/</DurUrl><IsDurRestrictions xsi:nil="true"/><DurRestrictionReasonId xsi:nil="true"/><DurEmbargoDate xsi:nil="true"/></OutputDur></OutputDurs></rfc1807>
spelling v2 66634 2024-06-10 Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses fd2ee0c494abf5744c49ab6dd1f034bc 0000-0002-5938-5457 Edwin Burns Edwin Burns true false 2024-06-10 PSYS The Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (DSM-5) approach to neurocognitive disorders recommends diagnosing cognitive impairment when a patient scores beyond -1 SD below neurotypical norms on two cognitive tests. I review how this approach will fail due to cognitive tests’ power limitations, validity issues, imperfect reliabilities, and biases, before summarising their resulting negative consequences. As a proof of concept, I use developmental prosopagnosia, a condition characterised by difficulties recognising faces, to show the DSM-5 only diagnoses 62-70% (n1 = 61, n2 = 165) versus 100% (n1 = 61) through symptoms alone. Pooling the DSM-5 missed cases confirmed the presence of group-level impairments on objective tests, which were further evidenced through meta-analyses, thus validating their highly atypical symptoms. These findings support a paradigm shift towards bespoke diagnostic approaches for distinct cognitive impairments, including a symptom-based method when validated effective. I reject dogmatic adherence to the DSM-5 approach to neurocognitive disorders, and underscore the importance of a data driven, transdiagnostic approach to understanding patients’ subjective cognitive impairments. This will ultimately benefit patients, their families, clinicians, and scientific progress. Journal Article Behavior Research Methods 8 7 2024 2024-07-08 10.3758/s13428-024-02459-4 COLLEGE NANME Psychology School COLLEGE CODE PSYS Swansea University SU Library paid the OA fee (TA Institutional Deal) Swansea University 2024-07-08T21:31:43.5207203 2024-06-10T09:17:12.7479859 Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences School of Psychology Edwin Burns 0000-0002-5938-5457 1 66634__30642__b1924b7548b94ad0ade1c766cca40159.pdf DSM5LimitationsDPEmailtoBRM (1).pdf 2024-06-13T22:55:54.0032661 Output 1081006 application/pdf Accepted Manuscript true false 253 true https://osf.io/3x86n/
title Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses
spellingShingle Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses
Edwin Burns
title_short Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses
title_full Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses
title_fullStr Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses
title_full_unstemmed Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses
title_sort Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses
author_id_str_mv fd2ee0c494abf5744c49ab6dd1f034bc
author_id_fullname_str_mv fd2ee0c494abf5744c49ab6dd1f034bc_***_Edwin Burns
author Edwin Burns
author2 Edwin Burns
format Journal article
container_title Behavior Research Methods
publishDate 2024
institution Swansea University
doi_str_mv 10.3758/s13428-024-02459-4
college_str Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
department_str School of Psychology{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences{{{_:::_}}}School of Psychology
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description The Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (DSM-5) approach to neurocognitive disorders recommends diagnosing cognitive impairment when a patient scores beyond -1 SD below neurotypical norms on two cognitive tests. I review how this approach will fail due to cognitive tests’ power limitations, validity issues, imperfect reliabilities, and biases, before summarising their resulting negative consequences. As a proof of concept, I use developmental prosopagnosia, a condition characterised by difficulties recognising faces, to show the DSM-5 only diagnoses 62-70% (n1 = 61, n2 = 165) versus 100% (n1 = 61) through symptoms alone. Pooling the DSM-5 missed cases confirmed the presence of group-level impairments on objective tests, which were further evidenced through meta-analyses, thus validating their highly atypical symptoms. These findings support a paradigm shift towards bespoke diagnostic approaches for distinct cognitive impairments, including a symptom-based method when validated effective. I reject dogmatic adherence to the DSM-5 approach to neurocognitive disorders, and underscore the importance of a data driven, transdiagnostic approach to understanding patients’ subjective cognitive impairments. This will ultimately benefit patients, their families, clinicians, and scientific progress.
published_date 2024-07-08T21:31:44Z
_version_ 1804044289817182208
score 11.01628

Similar Items