King's College London

Research portal

Accuracy of diagnostic judgments using ICD-11 vs. ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Accuracy of diagnostic judgments using ICD-11 vs. ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders. / Kogan, Cary S.; Stein, Dan J.; Rebello, Tahilia J.; Keeley, Jared W.; Chan, K. Jacky; Fineberg, Naomi A.; Fontenelle, Leonardo F.; Grant, Jon E.; Matsunaga, Hisato; Simpson, H. Blair; Thomsen, Per Hove; van den Heuvel, Odile A.; Veale, David; Grenier, Jean; Kulygina, Mayya; Matsumoto, Chihiro; Domínguez-Martínez, Tecelli; Stona, Anne Claire; Wang, Zhen; Reed, Geoffrey M.

In: Journal of Affective Disorders, Vol. 273, 01.08.2020, p. 328-340.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Kogan, CS, Stein, DJ, Rebello, TJ, Keeley, JW, Chan, KJ, Fineberg, NA, Fontenelle, LF, Grant, JE, Matsunaga, H, Simpson, HB, Thomsen, PH, van den Heuvel, OA, Veale, D, Grenier, J, Kulygina, M, Matsumoto, C, Domínguez-Martínez, T, Stona, AC, Wang, Z & Reed, GM 2020, 'Accuracy of diagnostic judgments using ICD-11 vs. ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders', Journal of Affective Disorders, vol. 273, pp. 328-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.03.103

APA

Kogan, C. S., Stein, D. J., Rebello, T. J., Keeley, J. W., Chan, K. J., Fineberg, N. A., ... Reed, G. M. (2020). Accuracy of diagnostic judgments using ICD-11 vs. ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders. Journal of Affective Disorders, 273, 328-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.03.103

Vancouver

Kogan CS, Stein DJ, Rebello TJ, Keeley JW, Chan KJ, Fineberg NA et al. Accuracy of diagnostic judgments using ICD-11 vs. ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2020 Aug 1;273:328-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.03.103

Author

Kogan, Cary S. ; Stein, Dan J. ; Rebello, Tahilia J. ; Keeley, Jared W. ; Chan, K. Jacky ; Fineberg, Naomi A. ; Fontenelle, Leonardo F. ; Grant, Jon E. ; Matsunaga, Hisato ; Simpson, H. Blair ; Thomsen, Per Hove ; van den Heuvel, Odile A. ; Veale, David ; Grenier, Jean ; Kulygina, Mayya ; Matsumoto, Chihiro ; Domínguez-Martínez, Tecelli ; Stona, Anne Claire ; Wang, Zhen ; Reed, Geoffrey M. / Accuracy of diagnostic judgments using ICD-11 vs. ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders. In: Journal of Affective Disorders. 2020 ; Vol. 273. pp. 328-340.

Bibtex Download

@article{8bc4df795195495ca403bed5b0dfacb0,
title = "Accuracy of diagnostic judgments using ICD-11 vs. ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders",
abstract = "Background: We report results of an internet-based field study evaluating the diagnostic guidelines for the newly introduced ICD-11 grouping of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders (OCRD). We examined accuracy of clinicians’ diagnostic judgments applying draft ICD-11 as compared to the ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines to standardized case vignettes. Methods: 1,717 mental health professionals who are members of the World Health Organization's Global Clinical Practice Network completed the study in Chinese, English, French, Japanese, Russian or Spanish. Participants were randomly assigned to apply ICD-11 or ICD-10 guidelines to one of nine pairs of case vignettes. Results: Participants using ICD-11 outperformed those using ICD-10 in correctly identifying newly introduced OCRD, although results were mixed for differentiating OCRD from disorders in other groupings largely due to clinicians having difficulty differentiating challenging presentations of OCD. Clinicians had difficulty applying a three-level insight qualifier, although the ‘poor to absent’ level assisted with differentiating OCRD from psychotic disorders. Brief training on the rationale for an OCRD grouping did not improve diagnostic accuracy suggesting sufficient detail of the proposed guidelines. Limitations: Standardized case vignettes were manipulated to include specific characteristics; the degree of accuracy of clinicians’ diagnostic judgments about these vignettes may not generalize to application in routine clinical practice. Conclusions: Overall, use of the ICD-11 guidelines resulted in more accurate diagnosis of case vignettes compared to the ICD-10 guidelines, particularly in differentiating OCRD presentations from one another. Specific areas in which the ICD-11 guidelines did not perform as intended provided the basis for further revisions to the guidelines.",
keywords = "Classification, Diagnosis, Field study, ICD-11, International classification of diseases and related health problems, Obsessive-compulsive and related disorders",
author = "Kogan, {Cary S.} and Stein, {Dan J.} and Rebello, {Tahilia J.} and Keeley, {Jared W.} and Chan, {K. Jacky} and Fineberg, {Naomi A.} and Fontenelle, {Leonardo F.} and Grant, {Jon E.} and Hisato Matsunaga and Simpson, {H. Blair} and Thomsen, {Per Hove} and {van den Heuvel}, {Odile A.} and David Veale and Jean Grenier and Mayya Kulygina and Chihiro Matsumoto and Tecelli Dom{\'i}nguez-Mart{\'i}nez and Stona, {Anne Claire} and Zhen Wang and Reed, {Geoffrey M.}",
year = "2020",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jad.2020.03.103",
language = "English",
volume = "273",
pages = "328--340",
journal = "Journal of affective disorders",
issn = "0165-0327",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Accuracy of diagnostic judgments using ICD-11 vs. ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders

AU - Kogan, Cary S.

AU - Stein, Dan J.

AU - Rebello, Tahilia J.

AU - Keeley, Jared W.

AU - Chan, K. Jacky

AU - Fineberg, Naomi A.

AU - Fontenelle, Leonardo F.

AU - Grant, Jon E.

AU - Matsunaga, Hisato

AU - Simpson, H. Blair

AU - Thomsen, Per Hove

AU - van den Heuvel, Odile A.

AU - Veale, David

AU - Grenier, Jean

AU - Kulygina, Mayya

AU - Matsumoto, Chihiro

AU - Domínguez-Martínez, Tecelli

AU - Stona, Anne Claire

AU - Wang, Zhen

AU - Reed, Geoffrey M.

PY - 2020/8/1

Y1 - 2020/8/1

N2 - Background: We report results of an internet-based field study evaluating the diagnostic guidelines for the newly introduced ICD-11 grouping of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders (OCRD). We examined accuracy of clinicians’ diagnostic judgments applying draft ICD-11 as compared to the ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines to standardized case vignettes. Methods: 1,717 mental health professionals who are members of the World Health Organization's Global Clinical Practice Network completed the study in Chinese, English, French, Japanese, Russian or Spanish. Participants were randomly assigned to apply ICD-11 or ICD-10 guidelines to one of nine pairs of case vignettes. Results: Participants using ICD-11 outperformed those using ICD-10 in correctly identifying newly introduced OCRD, although results were mixed for differentiating OCRD from disorders in other groupings largely due to clinicians having difficulty differentiating challenging presentations of OCD. Clinicians had difficulty applying a three-level insight qualifier, although the ‘poor to absent’ level assisted with differentiating OCRD from psychotic disorders. Brief training on the rationale for an OCRD grouping did not improve diagnostic accuracy suggesting sufficient detail of the proposed guidelines. Limitations: Standardized case vignettes were manipulated to include specific characteristics; the degree of accuracy of clinicians’ diagnostic judgments about these vignettes may not generalize to application in routine clinical practice. Conclusions: Overall, use of the ICD-11 guidelines resulted in more accurate diagnosis of case vignettes compared to the ICD-10 guidelines, particularly in differentiating OCRD presentations from one another. Specific areas in which the ICD-11 guidelines did not perform as intended provided the basis for further revisions to the guidelines.

AB - Background: We report results of an internet-based field study evaluating the diagnostic guidelines for the newly introduced ICD-11 grouping of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders (OCRD). We examined accuracy of clinicians’ diagnostic judgments applying draft ICD-11 as compared to the ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines to standardized case vignettes. Methods: 1,717 mental health professionals who are members of the World Health Organization's Global Clinical Practice Network completed the study in Chinese, English, French, Japanese, Russian or Spanish. Participants were randomly assigned to apply ICD-11 or ICD-10 guidelines to one of nine pairs of case vignettes. Results: Participants using ICD-11 outperformed those using ICD-10 in correctly identifying newly introduced OCRD, although results were mixed for differentiating OCRD from disorders in other groupings largely due to clinicians having difficulty differentiating challenging presentations of OCD. Clinicians had difficulty applying a three-level insight qualifier, although the ‘poor to absent’ level assisted with differentiating OCRD from psychotic disorders. Brief training on the rationale for an OCRD grouping did not improve diagnostic accuracy suggesting sufficient detail of the proposed guidelines. Limitations: Standardized case vignettes were manipulated to include specific characteristics; the degree of accuracy of clinicians’ diagnostic judgments about these vignettes may not generalize to application in routine clinical practice. Conclusions: Overall, use of the ICD-11 guidelines resulted in more accurate diagnosis of case vignettes compared to the ICD-10 guidelines, particularly in differentiating OCRD presentations from one another. Specific areas in which the ICD-11 guidelines did not perform as intended provided the basis for further revisions to the guidelines.

KW - Classification

KW - Diagnosis

KW - Field study

KW - ICD-11

KW - International classification of diseases and related health problems

KW - Obsessive-compulsive and related disorders

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85084737520&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jad.2020.03.103

DO - 10.1016/j.jad.2020.03.103

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85084737520

VL - 273

SP - 328

EP - 340

JO - Journal of affective disorders

JF - Journal of affective disorders

SN - 0165-0327

ER -

View graph of relations

© 2018 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454