4.1 Article

Toward ICD-11 Improving the Clinical Utility of WHO's International Classification of Mental Disorders

Journal

PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY-RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
Volume 41, Issue 6, Pages 457-464

Publisher

AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/a0021701

Keywords

classification; ICD; mental disorders; diagnosis; clinical utility

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article describes the current revision by the World Health Organization (WHO) of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD 10) ICD 10 is the basis for ICD 10 CM which will be introduced in 2013 as the official U S system U S psychologists will be required to use ICD 10 CM for all third party billing and reporting but are generally not familiar with the ICD or WHO s role in global health classification Although the U S lags behind other countries on the implementation of WHO s international classification systems psychologists and other health professionals will be affected by ICD 11 so It is important to understand Its development WHO views the current revision as an important opportunity to improve the clinical utility of the classification system for mental disorders Serious problems with the clinical utility of both the LCD and the DSM are widely acknowledged Clinical utility affects the daily lives of practitioners and is also a global public health issue Most people with mental disorders worldwide receive no treatment A diagnostic system with greater clinical utility can be a tool to improve identification and treatment helping WHO member countries to reduce the disease burden of mental disorders Consistent with this goal WHO s revision process is global multilingual and multidisciplinary and will produce different versions of the classification for clinical use research and primary care A systematic program of studies being undertaken by WHO aimed at improving clinical utility is described

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available