Cited by 40Mental Health and PsychiatryPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyMental Health Research Topics

Dimensional and Cross‐Cutting Assessment in the DSM‐5

Open access
Jones, K. Dayle·2012·Journal of Counseling & Development

Abstract

A significant proposed change to the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM‐5) that will significantly affect the way counselors diagnose mental disorders is the addition of dimensional assessments to the categorical diagnoses. The author reviews the current DSM's (4th ed., text rev.;American Psychiatric Association, 2000) categorical classification system, describes the proposed dimensional and cross‐cutting assessments, and provides implications about clinical utility and user acceptability of a dimensional diagnostic approach.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/j.1556-6676.2012.00059.x

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jones, K. D.
Affiliations
University of Central Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Jones, K. Dayle
Venue
Journal of Counseling & Development
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-09-12
Volume
90
Issue
4
Pages
481-487
ISSN
  • 0748-9633 (ISSN-L)
  • 1556-6676
OpenAlex
W1980701998
Cited by
40
References
33
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 2
FWCI
45.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Counseling & Development (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
DSM-5, dimensional assessment, categorical diagnosis, psychiatric diagnosis, psychiatric classification, clinical utility, user acceptance

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