Diagnosis, diagnostic systems and validation of psychotherapeutic models

Journal title RICERCA PSICOANALITICA
Author/s Enrico Benelli
Publishing Year 2019 Issue 2019/1
Language Italian Pages 16 P. 57-72 File size 197 KB
DOI 10.3280/RPR2019-001005
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The development of a psychotherapist’s diagnostic skills can retrace the history of the development of diagnosis in psychotherapy just like ontogenesis retraces phylogenesis. Historically we witnessed the passage from anti-diagnostic positions to constructive critical positions. It has been suggested that since diagnosis is an unavoidable component of clinical reasoning, anti-diagnostic positions reflect confusion between different levels of clinical reasoning (informal, formal and institutional) and different levels of diagnostic systems (school-specific, psychodynamic, health system). The Authors stress the importance of di-agnosis in the development of psychotherapy, its recognition in health systems both for the identification of the population it is addressed to and the recognition of psychotherapy as an evidence-based treatment. The Authors enumerate the risks of marginalization run by non-evidence-based psychotherapeutic models given the indications of the European Union which invite Member Countries to include the treatment of common mental health disorders in primary care. In closing they present a process in four steps for favoring the development of research in the models at risk of marginalization through the meta-analysis of single cases and benchmarking.

Keywords: Diagnosis, marginalized and emerging models of psycho-therapy, research of single case, benchmarking].

  1. American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition – DSM-5. Washington, D.C.: APA (trad. it.: DSM-5. Manuale diagnostico e statistico dei disturbi mentali. Quinta edizione. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore, 2014).
  2. American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force (2006). Evidence-based practice in psychology. American Psychologist, 61: 271-285.
  3. American Psychological Association Council (2012). Recognition of psychotherapy effectiveness. -- Testo disponibile al sito http://www.apa.org/about/policy/resolution-psychotherapy.aspx 20/08/2018.
  4. Benelli E. (2017). La ricerca sul caso clinico in psicoterapia. In: Messina I. e Sambin M., a cura di, Valutazione delle psicoterapie. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  5. Benelli E. (2018). Trattamento analitico transazionale dei disturbi depressivi di personalità. In: Widdowson M., editor, Analisi transazionale per i disturbi depressivi. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  6. Benelli E., De Carlo A., Biffi D., McLeod J. (2015). Hermeneutic Single Case Efficacy Design: A systematic review of published research and current standards. Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 22: 97-133. DOI: 10.4473/TPM22.1.7
  7. Blagys M.D., Hilsenroth M.J. (2002) Distinctive activities of short-term psychodynamic interpersonal psychotherapy: A review of the comparative psychotherapy process literature. Clinical Psychology Science and Practice, 7: 167-188.
  8. Chambless D.L., Hollon S.D. (1998). Defining empirically supported therapies. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 66: 7-18.
  9. Dal Corno F., Lingiardi V., Migone P. (2014). Prefazione all’edizione italiana. In: Frances A., editor, La diagnosi in psichiatria. Milano: Raffaello Cortina editore.
  10. Darden L., Maull N. (1977). Interfield theories. Philosophy of Science, 44: 43-64. DOI: 10.1086/288723
  11. Delgadillo J., McMillan D., Leach C., Lucock M., Gilbody S., Wood, N. (2014). Benchmarking routine psychological services: a discussion of challenges and methods. Behavioural and cognitive psychotherapy, 42: 16-30.
  12. Elliott R. (2002). Hermeneutic single-case efficacy design. Psychotherapy Research, 12: 1-21. DOI: 10.1080/713869614.
  13. EU Council (2011). Council conclusions on “The European Pact for Mental Health and Well-being: results and future action”. -- Retrieved from http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/lsa/122389.pdf. 20/08/2018.
  14. Fishman D. B. (1999). The case for pragmatic psychology. New York, NY: New York University Press.
  15. Freud S. (1892/1895). Studi sull’isteria (in collaborazione con J. Breuer). OSF Vol. 1. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
  16. Freud S. (1895). Per la psicoterapia dell’isteria. OSF Vol. 1. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
  17. Gabbard G.O. (2014). Psychodynamic Psychiatry in Clinical Practice, 5th ed. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Press (trad. it.: Psichiatria psicodinamica, 5a ed., Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore, 2015).
  18. Guyatt G.H. and the GRADE workingroup (2008). GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. British Medical Journal 336: 924-926.
  19. Hoffman I.Z. (2009). Doublethinking our way to scientific legitimacy: the desiccation of human experience. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 57: 1043-1069. DOI: 10.1177/0003065109343925
  20. Kroenke K., Spitzer R.L., Williams J.B.W. (2001). The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16: 606-613.
  21. Leichsenring F., Rabung S. (2008) Effectiveness of long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy: a meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association, 300: 1551–1565.
  22. Leichsenring F., Rabung S., Leibing E. (2004) The efficacy of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy in specific psychiatric disorders. A meta-analysis. Archives of General Psychiatry, 61: 1208-1216.
  23. Liberati A. and the PRISMA group (2009). The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151: 65-94. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136
  24. Lingiardi V., McWilliams N., a cura di (2017). Psycodynamic Diagnostic Manual Second Edition: (PDM-2.New York: Guilford Press (trad. it.: Manuale Diagnostico Psicodinamico, seconda edizione. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore, 2018).
  25. McLeod J. (2010). Case study research in counselling and psychotherapy. London, UK: Sage.
  26. McWilliams N. (1994). Psychoanalytic diagnosis. Understanding personality structure in the clinical process. New York, London: Guilford press (trad. it.: La diagnosi psicoanalitica. Roma: Astrolabio, 1999).
  27. National Collaborating Centre For Mental Health – NICE (2009). Depression: The treatment and management of depression in adults update – NICE clinical guideline 90. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence. -- Testo disponibile al sito: www.nice.org.uk/CG90 15/08/2018.
  28. Ogden T.H. (2016) Vite non vissute. Esperienze in psicoanalisi. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.
  29. OMS – Organizzazione mondiale della Sanità (2018). The ICD-11 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: Clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines. Geneva: OMS. Testo disponibile al sito https://icd.who.int. Consultato in data: 15/08/2018.
  30. OPD Task Force [Eds.]. (2008). Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis OPD-2. Goettingen: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers (trad. it.: Diagnosi Psicodinamica Operazionalizzata. Milano: FrancoAngeli, 2009).
  31. PDM Task Force (2006). Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual – PDM. Silver Spring, MD: Alliance of Psychoanalytic Organizations (trad. it.: PDM – Manuale Diagnostico Psicodinamico. Milano: Raffaello Cortina, 2008).
  32. Schulz K.F. and the CONSORT Group (2010). CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomised Trials. PLoS Med 7: 1-7.
  33. Shedler J., Westen D. e Lingiardi V. (2014). La valutazione della personalità con la SWAP 200 – Nuova edizione. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.
  34. Stiles W.B. (2007). Theory-building case studies of counselling and psychotherapy. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 7: 122-127. DOI: 10.1080/14733140701356742
  35. Stiles W.B., Hill C.E., Elliott R. (2015). Looking both ways. Psychotherapy Research, 25: 282-293. DOI: 10.1080/10503307.2014.981681
  36. Szasz T. (1960). The Myth of Mental Illness. Amer Psychologist 15: 113-18.
  37. Wampold B.E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  38. Westen D., Novotny C.M., Thompson-Brenner H. (2004). The empirical status of empirically supported psychotherapies: Assumptions, findings, and reporting in controlled clinical trials. Psychological Bulletin, 130: 631-663. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.130.4.631
  39. Westen D., Shedler J. e Lingiardi V. (2003). La valutazione della personalità con la SWAP 200. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.
  40. Zennaro A. (2011). Cos’è la psicopatologia. In: Zennaro A., a cura di, Lo sviluppo della psicopatologia. Bologna: il Mulino.

Enrico Benelli, Diagnosi, sistemi diagnostici e accreditamento dei modelli di psicoterapia in "RICERCA PSICOANALITICA" 1/2019, pp 57-72, DOI: 10.3280/RPR2019-001005