Is RDoC our Doc? The clinical translation of scientific inquiry

Malhi, Gin S; Bell, Erica

doi:10.1111/bdi.12835

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The MDcpg 2020 recognises practical strengths of these taxonomies such as their reliability, familiarity and frequency of uptake and therefore they remain an option for describing the clinical presentations of mood disorders. However, there are key aspects (see 1–3 below) that we consider to be important for achieving more accurate and meaningful diagnoses (Malhi and Bell, 2019c). In addition, the MDcpg 2020 provides alternative schemas that better approximate clinical description with reality and enrich diagnostic formulation:…”

Section: Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 2020 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders

Malhi

Bell

Bassett³

et al. 2020

Aust N Z J Psychiatry

Self Cite

343

365

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To provide advice and guidance regarding the management of mood disorders, derived from scientific evidence and supplemented by expert clinical consensus to formulate s that maximise clinical utility. Methods: Articles and information sourced from search engines including PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar were supplemented by literature known to the mood disorders committee (e.g. books, book chapters and government reports) and from published depression and bipolar disorder guidelines. Relevant information was appraised and discussed in detail by members of the mood disorders committee, with a view to formulating and developing consensus-based recommendations and clinical guidance. The guidelines were subjected to rigorous consultation and external review involving: expert and clinical advisors, key stakeholders, professional bodies and specialist groups with interest in mood disorders. Results: The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists mood disorders clinical practice guidelines 2020 (MDcpg2020) provide up-to-date guidance regarding the management of mood disorders that is informed by evidence and clinical experience. The guideline is intended for clinical use by psychiatrists, psychologists, primary care physicians and others with an interest in mental health care. Conclusion: The MDcpg2020 builds on the previous 2015 guidelines and maintains its joint focus on both depressive and bipolar disorders. It provides up-to-date recommendations and guidance within an evidence-based framework, supplemented by expert clinical consensus. Mood disorders committee: Gin S Malhi (Chair), Erica Bell, Darryl Bassett, Philip Boyce, Richard Bryant, Philip Hazell, Malcolm Hopwood, Bill Lyndon, Roger Mulder, Richard Porter, Ajeet B Singh and Greg Murray.

show abstract

Section: Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 2020 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders

Malhi

Bell

Bassett³

et al. 2020

Aust N Z J Psychiatry

Self Cite

343

365

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the major clinical problems is that our current taxonomy lacks specificity and fails to define clear boundaries of the disorder. Hence, significant effort has been invested to define BD across domains beyond its clinical symptoms, such as cognitive and behavioural functioning, neurophysiology, neural circuitry, at a molecular level and using genetic markers 5 . But thus far we still have a heterogeneous syndrome that is largely defined on the basis of clinical signs and symptoms.…”

Section: A Cautionary Note …mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The substantial heterogeneity and comorbidity associated with the current definition of BD renders it impossible to determine the true nature of the illness, and thus we are unable to test the underlying assumptions of staging ‐ such as neuroprogression and the illness following a predictable trajectory. To this day, researchers and clinicians alike, struggle to accurately classify a bipolar illness and vigorous debate regarding diagnostic classification (i.e., DSM/ICD vs RDoC) continues 5 . Therefore, it is necessary that we first focus our efforts on identifying a well‐defined, homogenous group, based on clinical symptomology by excluding all comorbidities and compounding variables (e.g., psychological and physical comorbidities, age, culture, and ethnicity).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Staging bipolar disorder: An alluring proposition

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In the commentary on the tension between the research Domain Criteria (RDoC) from NIMH and the DSM categories of psychiatric disorders, Gin Malhi discusses the origin, structure, and rationale for RDoC . The RDoC domains include negative valence, positive valence, cognitive systems, systems for social processes, and arousal/modulatory systems.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…

In the commentary on the tension between the research Domain Criteria (RDoC) from NIMH and the DSM categories of psychiatric disorders, Gin Malhi discusses the origin, structure, and rationale for RDoC. 1 The RDoC domains include negative valence, positive valence, cognitive systems, systems for social processes, and arousal/ modulatory systems. He includes a rather impressive RDoC schematic of the hierarchical levels of increasing complexity from genes, to molecules to circuits to physiology to behavior and then self-report derived DSM diagnoses.

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%