Cited by 409Mental Health Research TopicsPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 151 of the 151 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Transdiagnostic psychiatry: a systematic review

Open access

Abstract

The usefulness of current psychiatric classification, which is based on ICD/DSM categorical diagnoses, remains questionable. A promising alternative has been put forward as the “transdiagnostic” approach. This is expected to cut across existing categorical diagnoses and go beyond them, to improve the way we classify and treat mental disorders. This systematic review explores whether self‐defining transdiagnostic research meets such high expectations. A multi‐step Web of Science literature search was performed according to an a priori protocol, to identify all studies that used the word “transdiagnostic” in their title, up to May 5, 2018. Empirical variables which indexed core characteristics were extracted, complemented by a bibliometric and conceptual analysis. A total of 111 studies were included. Most studies were investigating interventions, followed by cognition and psychological processes, and neuroscientific topics. Their samples ranged from 15 to 91,199 (median 148) participants, with a mean age from 10 to more than 60 (median 33) years. There were several methodological inconsistencies relating to the definition of the gold standard (DSM/ICD diagnoses), of the outcome measures and of the transdiagnostic approach. The quality of the studies was generally low and only a few findings were externally replicated. The majority of studies tested transdiagnostic features cutting across different diagnoses, and only a few tested new classification systems beyond the existing diagnoses. About one fifth of the studies were not transdiagnostic at all, because they investigated symptoms and not disorders, a single disorder, or because there was no diagnostic information. The bibliometric analysis revealed that transdiagnostic research largely restricted its focus to anxiety and depressive disorders. The conceptual analysis showed that transdiagnostic research is grounded more on rediscoveries than on true innovations, and that it is affected by some conceptual biases. To date, transdiagnostic approaches have not delivered a credible paradigm shift that can impact classification and clinical care. Practical “TRANSD”iagnostic recommendations are proposed here to guide future research in this field.

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 · 10.1002/wps.20631

Cites

151 of 151 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

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?

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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 151 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 409

Metadata

Authors
Fusar‐Poli, P., Solmi, M., Brondino, N., Davies, C., Chae, C., Politi, P., Borgwardt, S., Lawrie, S. M., Parnas, J., & McGuire, P.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Padua (IT)
  • University of Pavia (IT)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • University of Basel (CH)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
Venue
World Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-05-06
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
192-207
ISSN
  • 1723-8617 (ISSN-L)
  • 2051-5545
OpenAlex
W2944431228
Cited by
409
References
151
Citations by year
2026: 59 · 2025: 70 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 67 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 20
FWCI
6.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • World Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • King's College London
  • Medical Research Council (MC_PC_16048)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
transdiagnostic psychiatry, psychiatric classification, DSM, ICD, mental illness, transdiagnostic features, anxiety disorders, depressive disorders, transdiagnostic treatment, research quality, research recommendations

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