Cited by 300Mental Health and PsychiatryMental Health Treatment and AccessMedical Coding and Health Information

A conceptual framework for the revision of the ICD‐10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders

Open access
International Advisory Group for the Revision of ICD‐10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders·2011·World Psychiatry

Abstract

The World Health Organization (WHO) is revising the ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders, under the leadership of the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse and within the framework of the overall revision framework as directed by the World Health Assembly. This article describes WHO's perspective and priorities for mental and behavioural disorders classification in ICD-11, based on the recommendations of the International Advisory Group for the Revision of ICD-10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders. The WHO considers that the classification should be developed in consultation with stakeholders, which include WHO member countries, multidisciplinary health professionals, and users of mental health services and their families. Attention to the cultural framework must be a key element in defining future classification concepts. Uses of the ICD that must be considered include clinical applications, research, teaching and training, health statistics, and public health. The Advisory Group has determined that the current revision represents a particular opportunity to improve the classification's clinical utility, particularly in global primary care settings where there is the greatest opportunity to identify people who need mental health treatment. Based on WHO's mission and constitution, the usefulness of the classification in helping WHO member countries, particularly low- and middle-income countries, to reduce the disease burden associated with mental disorders is among the highest priorities for the revision. This article describes the foundation provided by the recommendations of the Advisory Group for the current phase of work.

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 · 10.1002/j.2051-5545.2011.tb00022.x

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The 194 member states of the World Health Organization agree to use the ICD as a framework for reporting country-level health statistics.

    “The ICD is the most widely used diagnostic health classification worldwide and the 194 member states of the World Health Organization agree to use this classification as a framework for reporting country-level health statistics.”

    From The Classification of Anxiety and Fear-Related Disorders in the ICD-11: Review: Anxiety and Fear-Related Disorders in ICD-11 (2016) · cites this paper as [37]

    The paper’s “health statistics uses” section says ICD-10 is used for mandatory statistical reporting by WHO member countries, supporting the reporting-framework claim. But its opening discussion says WHO had 193 member countries, not 194. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • WHO tended to prioritize public health needs in its decisions: if there was convincing empirical evidence for the existence of a particular condition and that it was a legitimate focus of health care services, it was consistent with the purpose of ICD-11 to include it in the classification.

    “The WHO tended to prioritize public health needs in its decisions 28 : if there was convincing empirical evidence for the existence of a particular condition and that it was a legitimate focus of health care services, it was consistent with the purpose of the ICD-11 to include it in the classification.”

    From An organization‐ and category‐level comparison of diagnostic requirements for mental disorders in <scp>ICD</scp> ‐11 and <scp>DSM</scp> ‐5 (2021) · cites this paper as [28]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The ICD-11 focused on clinical and public health utility, with an explicit aim of improving primary care in non-specialist settings.

    “In its deliberations, the ICD-11 focused on clinical and public health utility, with an explicit aim of improving primary care in non-specialist settings [18].”
  • The ICD is used for a range of purposes from making individual diagnoses at the encounter level to providing data for setting global health policy priorities.

    “As a key public health instrument, the ICD is used for a range of purposes from making individual diagnoses at the encounter level to providing data for setting global health policy priorities.[37]”
  • The ICD is the most widely used diagnostic health classification worldwide.

    “The ICD is the most widely used diagnostic health classification worldwide and the 194 member states of the World Health Organization agree to use this classification as a framework for reporting country-level health statistics.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. World Health Organization. Basic documents, 46th edition. Gene- va: World Health Organization, 2007.
  2. Andrews G, Goldberg DP, Krueger RF et al. Exploring the feasibility of a meta-structure for DSM-V and ICD-11: could it improve utility and validity? Psychol Med 2009;39:1993-2000.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
International Advisory Group for the Revision of ICD‐10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders
Affiliations
World Health Organization (CH)
Corresponding author
International Advisory Group for the Revision of ICD‐10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders
Venue
World Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-06
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
86-92
ISSN
  • 1723-8617 (ISSN-L)
  • 2051-5545
OpenAlex
W2971559012
Cited by
300
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 19
FWCI
171.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • World Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
Keywords
ICD-11, ICD-10 revision, mental and behavioral disorders, psychiatric classification, stakeholder consultation, cultural frameworks, clinical utility, primary care, low- and middle-income countries, mental health burden, International Classification of Diseases

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