The status quo as a good outcome: How the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for generalized anxiety disorder remained unchanged from the DSM-IV criteria

Starčević, Vladan; Portman, Michael E.

doi:10.1177/0004867413503719

Cited by 23 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the build-up to the 2013 revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013), as for most disorders, there had been work groups, field studies, expert consensus and articles considering possible changes for GAD under DSM-5. There was a great deal of discussion (see Starcevic et al, 2012;Starcevic and Portman, 2013) but eventually very little changed. However, there was a very interesting proposal, namely that there may be some GAD-specific behaviours.…”

Section: Understanding Behaviour In Response To Uncertaintymentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a model of uncertainty distress in the context of Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Freeston

Tiplady²,

Mawn

et al. 2020

tCBT

159

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract The paper forms part of a series of papers outlining the theoretical framework for a new model of uncertainty distress (this paper), treatment implications arising from the model, and empirical tests of the model. We define uncertainty distress as the subjective negative emotions experienced in response to the as yet unknown aspects of a given situation. In the first paper we drawn on a robust body of research on distinct areas including: threat models of anxiety, perceived illness uncertainty and intolerance of uncertainty. We explore how threat and uncertainty are separable in anxiety and how we can understand behaviours in response to uncertainty. Finally, we propose a clinically, theoretically, and empirically informed model for uncertainty distress and outline how this model can be tested. Caveats, clinical applications and practitioner key points are briefly included, although these are more fully outlined in the treatment implications article. While we outline this model in the context of novel coronavirus (Covid-19), the model has broader applications to both mental and physical health care settings.

show abstract

Section: Understanding Behaviour In Response To Uncertaintymentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a model of uncertainty distress in the context of Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Freeston

Tiplady²,

Mawn

et al. 2020

tCBT

159

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the build-up to the 2013 revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5, American Psychiatric Association, 2013), as for most disorders, there had been work groups, field studies, expert consensus, and articles considering possible changes for GAD under DSM-5. There was a great deal of discussion (see Andrews, Hobbs, Borkovec, Beesdo, Craske, Heimberg, et al, 2010;Andrews & Hobbs, 2010;Starcevic, Portman, & Beck;2012Starcevic, & Portman, 2013 but eventually very little changed. However, there was a very interesting proposal, namely that there may be some GAD specific behaviours.…”

Section: Understanding Behaviour In Response To Uncertaintymentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a model of uncertainty distress in the context of Coronavirus (Covid-19)

Freeston¹,

Tiplady²,

Mawn³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper forms part of a series of papers outlining the theoretical framework for a new model of uncertainty distress (this paper), treatment implications arising from the model, and empirical tests of the model. We define uncertainty distress as the subjective negative emotions experienced in response to the as yet unknown aspects of a given situation. In the first paper we drawn on a robust body of research on distinct areas including: threat models of anxiety, perceived illness uncertainty and intolerance of uncertainty. We explore how threat and uncertainty are separable in anxiety and how we can understand behaviours in response to uncertainty. Finally, we propose a clinically, theoretically, and empirically informed model for uncertainty distress and outline how this model can be tested. Caveats, clinical applications and practitioner key points are briefly included, although these are more fully outlined in the treatment implications article. While we outline this model in the context of novel coronavirus (Covid-19), the model has broader applications to both mental and physical health care settings.

show abstract

“…The diagnostic criteria for generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) remained the same as in DSM-IV, which was deemed positive relative to the unjustified proposals to broaden the concept of GAD (Starcevic and Portman, 2013).…”

Section: Anxiety Disorders As the Shrinking Domain Of Psychopathologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Classification of anxiety disorders: Changes, conundrums and consequences

Starčević

2014

Aust N Z J Psychiatry

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The status quo as a good outcome: How the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for generalized anxiety disorder remained unchanged from the DSM-IV criteria

Cited by 23 publications

References 16 publications

Towards a model of uncertainty distress in the context of Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Towards a model of uncertainty distress in the context of Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Towards a model of uncertainty distress in the context of Coronavirus (Covid-19)

Classification of anxiety disorders: Changes, conundrums and consequences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About