Cited by 15Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research

Updating Diagnostic Criteria for Dissociative Disorders: Learning from Scientific Advances

Steinberg, Marlene·2001·Journal of Trauma & Dissociation

Abstract

(2001). Updating Diagnostic Criteria for Dissociative Disorders. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation: Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 59-63.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1300/j229v02n01_07

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Steinberg, M.
Affiliations
University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
Corresponding author
Steinberg, Marlene
Venue
Journal of Trauma & Dissociation
Published
2001-05-24
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
59-63
ISSN
  • 1529-9732 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-9740
OpenAlex
W2910089211
Cited by
15
References
20
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Trauma & Dissociation (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Keywords
dissociative disorders, diagnostic criteria, DSM-IV-TR, dissociative identity disorder, depersonalization, derealization, dissociative amnesia, dissociative fugue

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