Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 355

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multisomatoform Disorder: An Alternative to Undifferentiated Somatoform Disorder for the Somatizing Patient in Primary Care

Kroenke, Kurt·1997·Archives of General Psychiatry
DOI 10.1001/archpsyc.1997.01830160080011
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For clinical or research use in primary care, the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for somatization disorder are too restrictive, while the criteria for undifferentiated somatoform disorder are overly inclusive. In this article, we examine the validity of multisomatoform disorder, defined as 3 or more medically unexplained, currently bothersome physical symptoms plus a long (> or = 2 years) history of somatization. METHODS: Data from the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders Study of 1000 patients from 4 primary care sites were analyzed. The outcomes assessed were 6 domains of health-related quality of life, using the 20-item Short-Form General Health Survey; self-reported disability days and health care use; satisfaction with care; and physician-rated difficulty of the encounter. RESULTS: Multisomatoform disorder was diagnosed in 82 (8.2%) of the 1000 patients who were enrolled in the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders Study. Compared with mood and anxiety disorders, multisomatoform disorder was associated with comparable impairment in health-related quality of life, more self-reported disability days and clinic visits, and greater clinician-perceived patient difficulty. CONCLUSIONS: Multisomatoform disorder may be a valid diagnosis and potentially more useful than the DSM-IV diagnosis of undifferentiated somatoform disorder. Also, because multisomatoform disorder has a large and independent effect on impairment, its diagnosis should not be precluded simply because of a coexisting mood or anxiety disorder.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archpsyc.1997.01830160080011

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Kroenke, K.
Venue
Archives of General Psychiatry
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
1997-04-01
Volume
54
Issue
4
Pages
352
ISSN
0003-990X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/archpsyc.1997.01830160080011
OpenAlex
W1979947068
Cited by
355
References
6
FWCI
7.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.