Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • Concerns about depression

  • HM van Praag
  • Journal:
    European Psychiatry / Volume 10 / Issue 6 / 1995
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 April 2020, pp. 269-275
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • Biological depression research can boast of a number of significant achievements over the past 35 years. Yet, in spite of those achievements, the field is in danger of desiccation. Five reasons are discussed herein: 1) short-comings of the DSM-based depression classification; 2) the ever increasing number of, generally poorly validated, diagnostic categories; 3) desubjectivation of psychiatric diagnosing; 4) the lack of a dimensional (better: functional) component in diagnosing depression; and 5) horizontalism, ie the absence of attempts to group symptoms “vertically” according to their diagnostic weight. The issues are in need of urgent scientific attention, lest biological depression research will stagnate and ultimately whither. We have indicated ways to approach the issues.