Cited by 185Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 105 of the 107 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders: A Critical Review of the New Diagnostic Class

Open access
Abramowitz, Jonathan S., Jacoby, Ryan J.·2015·Annual Review of Clinical Psychology

Abstract

The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders includes a new class of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders (OCRDs) that includes obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and a handful of other putatively related conditions. Although this new category promises to raise awareness of underrecognized and understudied problems, its empirical validity and practical utility are questionable. This article reviews the phenomenology of OCD and then presents a critical analysis of the arguments underlying the new OCRD class. This analysis leads to a rejection of the OCRD classification on both scientific and logical grounds. The article closes with a discussion of the treatment implications of the OCRDs approach.

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 · 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153713

Cites

105 of 105 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

Show all 107 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Arbabi M, 2008, Acta Med. Iran., 46, 367
  2. Hollander E, 2004, Clin. Neuropsychiatry, 1, 32
  3. Hollander E, 1996, J. Clin. Psychiatry, 57, 3
  4. Ipser JC, 2009, Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., 2009, CD005332
  5. Koran LM, 2007, Am. J. Psychiatry, 164, 5
  6. Piacentini JC, 2006, Adv. Neurol., 99, 227
  7. Stein DJ, 1995, J. Clin. Psychiatry, 56, 28
  8. Zohar J, 2004, J. Clin. Psychiatry, 65, 18

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Abramowitz, J. S., & Jacoby, R. J.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Venue
Annual Review of Clinical Psychology
Published
2015-03-28
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
165-186
ISSN
  • 1548-5943 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-5951
OpenAlex
W2137719365
Cited by
185
References
107
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 4
FWCI
2.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annual Review of Clinical Psychology (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 and related disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, DSM-5, psychiatric classification, diagnostic validity, therapeutic implications
MeSH terms
Hoarding Disorder, Humans, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Trichotillomania, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Body Dysmorphic Disorders

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