Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (Ocd) Is Still An Unrecognised Disorder: A Study On The Recognition Of Ocd In Psychiatric Outpatients
Abstract
Objective: The study aims to investigate the recognition of patients with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) in psychiatric outpatients. Subjects and methods: A total of 2282 outpatients seen at 14 different psychiatric clinics in South Germany were asked to participate in the study. Five hundred and eighty-nine (30%) of the original 2282 patients met screening criteria for OCD, and of those, 237 (42%) participated in the final interview including DSM-IV diagnosis, and comorbidity. Results: Sixty-nine of 589 participating patients who screened positively for obsessive symptoms actually had an Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. Only 19 (28%) of the outpatients diagnosed with OCD according to DSM-IV criteria were also given this diagnosis by their consultant. The psychopathology scores indicated that the OCD patients had clinically relevant OCD with a mean Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Score (Y-BOCS) of 17.5 (± 5.4), and a mean Clinical Global Impression Score (CGI) of 5.2 (± 1.2). Conclusions: In outpatient clinics over 70% of OCD patients remain unrecognised and thus untreated by consultants. Screening questions provide a rapid way of identifying those who may have OCD and should be incorporated into every mental state examination by consultants.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Individuals may go undiagnosed and untreated for many years due to a failure of health professionals to recognise OCD and to intense feelings of embarrassment and guilt motivating patients not to disclose their experiences.
“Individuals may go undiagnosed and untreated for many years due to a failure of health professionals to recognise OCD [21] and to intense feelings of embarrassment and guilt motivating patients to not disclose their experiences [16, 22].”
From Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of internet-based cognitive-behavioural therapy for obsessive-compulsive disorder (2014) · cites this paper as [21]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 32 · Cited by 69
- Authors
- Wahl, K., Kordon, A., Kuelz, K. A., Voderholzer, U., Hohagen, F., & Zurowski, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Lübeck (DE)
- University Medical Center Freiburg (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Kordon, A.
- Venue
- European Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2010-11
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 374-377
- ISSN
- 0924-9338 (ISSN-L)
- 1778-3585
- OpenAlex
- W2137730606
- Cited by
- 69
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 3.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
- Keywords
- obsessive-compulsive disorder, underdiagnosis, psychiatric outpatients, diagnostic recognition, screening, DSM-IV diagnosis, comorbidities, Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale, Clinical Global Impression Scale
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Outpatients, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires
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