Psychiatric Disorder Criteria and their Application to Research in Different Racial Groups

BACKGROUND: The advent of standardized classification and assessment of psychiatric disorders, and considerable joint efforts among many countries has led to the reporting of international rates of psychiatric disorders, and inevitably, their comparison between different racial groups. RESULTS: In neurologic diseases with defined genetic etiologies, the same genetic cause has different phenotypes in different racial groups. CONCLUSION: We suggest that genetic differences between races mean that diagnostic criteria refined in one racial group, may not be directly and simply applicable to other racial groups and thus more effort needs to be expended on defining diseases in other groups. Cross-racial confounds (in addition to cultural confounds) make the interpretation of rates in different groups even more hazardous than seems to have been appreciated

Bicultural identity among economical migrants from three south European countries living in Switzerland. Adaptation and validation of a new psychometric instrument

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Acculturation is one of the determinants of mental health among immigrants. Evaluating adaptation to the host culture is insufficient, since immigrants will develop various degrees of bi- or multicultural identity. However, mental health professionals lack simple and easy to use instruments to guide them with bicultural identity evaluation in their practice. Our aim was to develop such an instrument to be used for clinical purposes among economical migrants from three South European countries living in Geneva, Switzerland.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We adapted from existing instruments a 24 item bi-dimensional scale to assess involvement in both culture of origin and host culture. The study included 93 immigrant adults from three south European countries (Italy, Portugal and Spain). Thirty-eight patients were recruited in an outpatient treatment program for alcohol-related problems and 55 participants were hospital employees.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The questionnaire was rated as easy or rather easy by 97.8% of participants. Median time to complete it was 5 minutes. The instrument allowed discriminating between patients and healthy subjects, with scores for Swiss culture significantly higher among hospital workers. The subscales related to culture of origin and host culture displayed adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.77 and 0.73 respectively).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>It is possible to assist clinicians' assessment of cultural identity of Italian, Portuguese and Spanish economical immigrants in Switzerland with a single and easy to use instrument.</p

Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF): properties and frontier of current knowledge

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) is well known internationally and widely used for scoring the severity of illness in psychiatry. Problems with GAF show a need for its further development (for example validity and reliability problems). The aim of the present study was to identify gaps in current knowledge about properties of GAF that are of interest for further development. Properties of GAF are defined as characteristic traits or attributes that serve to define GAF (or may have a role to define a future updated GAF). METHODS: A thorough literature search was conducted. RESULTS: A number of gaps in knowledge about the properties of GAF were identified: for example, the current GAF has a continuous scale, but is a continuous or categorical scale better? Scoring is not performed by setting a mark directly on a visual scale, but could this improve scoring? Would new anchor points, including key words and examples, improve GAF (anchor points for symptoms, functioning, positive mental health, prognosis, improvement of generic properties, exclusion criteria for scoring in 10-point intervals, and anchor points at the endpoints of the scale)? Is a change in the number of anchor points and their distribution over the total scale important? Could better instructions for scoring within 10-point intervals improve scoring? Internationally, both single and dual scales for GAF are used, but what is the advantage of having separate symptom and functioning scales? Symptom (GAF-S) and functioning (GAF-F) scales should score different dimensions and still be correlated, but what is the best combination of definitions for GAF-S and GAF-F? For GAF with more than two scales there is limited empirical testing, but what is gained or lost by using more than two scales? CONCLUSIONS: In the history of GAF, its basic properties have undergone limited changes. Problems with GAF may, in part, be due to lack of a research programme testing the effects of different changes in basic properties. Given the widespread use, research-based development of GAF has not been especially strong. Further research could improve GAF