If Kraepelin was still alive would dichotomy still survive?

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorAlt?nbaş, Kürşat
dc.contributor.authorTunç, Serhat
dc.contributor.authorYazar, Menekşe S?la
dc.contributor.authorÖzçetinkaya, Serap
dc.contributor.authorGülöksüz, Sinan
dc.contributor.authorOral, Esat Timuçin
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-12T19:47:12Z
dc.date.available2024-10-12T19:47:12Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.departmentİstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractEmil Kraepelin's dichotomy, which has been providing a basis for psychiatric classification, has been valid for many years. However, dimensional approaches based on the recent evidences from genetic, biological and clinical researches are in agreement, putting forth the need of this dichotomous view's revision for consideration. In particular, failure of describing many of the psychiatric cases in nature with descriptive paradigm used for psychiatric classification in clinical practice hinders clinicians' effort for developing a common language and leads to the questioning of psychiatric diagnoses' stability. In fact, it has been stated that the descriptive validity was low in the patient group with both psychotic and affective symptoms. It has also been informed that bipolar disorder and schizophrenia were presented with common symptom clusters in the studies evaluating the patterns of clinical symptom clustering with factor analysis. Moreover, some of the candidate genes developing susceptibility for each disorder have been shown to be common in the recent genetic studies, suggesting there is an overlap between these disorders. It appears that dimensional approach suggested by geneticists is consistent with the data from clinical researches. In the light of these clinical and genetic evidences, famous German scientist Emil Kraepelin's ground-breaking dichotomous approach in psychiatry should be revised after a century. Who knows if Kraepelin was still alive, maybe he would change his dichotomous view after a while.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.5350/DAJPN2011240408
dc.identifier.endpage330en_US
dc.identifier.issn1018-8681
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84455200910en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityN/Aen_US
dc.identifier.startpage321en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5350/DAJPN2011240408
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11467/8810
dc.identifier.volume24en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isotren_US
dc.publisherKare Publishingen_US
dc.relation.ispartofDusunen Adam - The Journal of Psychiatry and Neurological Sciencesen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.snmzScopus_20241012en_US
dc.subjectDichotomyen_US
dc.subjectDimensional viewen_US
dc.subjectGeneticen_US
dc.subjectKraepelinen_US
dc.titleIf Kraepelin was still alive would dichotomy still survive?en_US
dc.title.alternativeKraepelin bugün yaşasayd? dikotomi varl???n? sürdürüyor olur muydu?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu