Click here to download

Diagnosis, diagnostic systems and validation of psychotherapeutic models
Journal Title: RICERCA PSICOANALITICA 
Author/s: Enrico Benelli 
Year:  2019 Issue: 1 Language: Italian 
Pages:  16 Pg. 57-72 FullText PDF:  197 KB
DOI:  10.3280/RPR2019-001005
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


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, Diagnosis, diagnostic systems and validation of psychotherapeutic models in "RICERCA PSICOANALITICA" 1/2019, pp. 57-72, DOI:10.3280/RPR2019-001005

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content