Search

Background: Just before the official launch of the DSM-5 in 2013, the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative of the National Institute of Mental Health was made public and is becoming increasingly more important in psychiatric research. Objective: The aim of this paper is to clarify the conceptual approach of RDoC, to systematically discuss limitations, to present exemplary RDoC-based studies and to consider the relevance of the RDoC concepts for clinicians and scientists. Material and methods: The is a qualitative introduction and review article with a critical discussion. Results and discussion: The RDoC initiative was not conceived as an alternative diagnostic manual to DSM-5 or IDC-10/11 for use in clinical practice. It is a new systematic framework for psychiatric research based on the most recent results of cognitive neuroscience and aims to map mental disorders dimensionally and transdiagnostically. Despite some weaknesses, it is currently the most elaborated and scientifically grounded approach for multidisciplinary research on mental disorders. In contrast to the purely symptom-based DSM and ICD approaches, which are agnostic with respect to the pathogenesis of mental diseases, the explicit aim of the RDoC initiative is to systematize biological knowledge about risk factors and causes of mental disorders; therefore, it has a much greater potential to develop new and individualized therapeutic strategies based on disease mechanisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objectives: The German health interview and examination survey for adults (DEGS1) with the mental health module (DEGS1-MH) is the successor to the last survey of mental disorders in the general German population 15 years ago (GHS-MHS). This paper reports the basic findings on the 12-month prevalence of mental disorders, associated disabilities and self-reported healthcare utilization. Methods: A representative national cohort (age range 18-79 years, n = 5,317) was selected and individuals were personally examined (87.5 % face to face and 12.5 % via telephone) by a comprehensive clinical interview using the composite international diagnostic interview (CIDI) questionnaire. Results: The overall 12-month prevalence of mental disorders was 27.7 % with substantial differences between subgroups (e.g. sex, age, socioeconomic status). Mental disorders were found to be particularly impairing (elevated number of disability days). Less than 50 % of those affected reported to be in contact with health services due to mental health problems within the last 12 months (range 10-40 % depending on the number of diagnoses). Conclusions: Mental disorders were found to be commonplace with a prevalence level comparable to that found in the 1998 predecessor study but several further adjustments will have to be made for a sound methodological comparison between the studies. Apart from individual distress, elevated self-reported disability indicated a high societal disease burden of mental disorders (also in comparison with many somatic diseases). Despite a relatively comprehensive and well developed mental healthcare system in Germany there are still optimisation needs for treatment rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reviews the concepts, evidence and implications regarding mental health at the workplace. The theoretical background with the most common theories (e.g. effort-reward imbalance model and job-demand control model) are briefly reviewed and findings from systematic reviews and from a meta-analysis regarding psychosocial factors at the workplace and common mental disorders, which indicate that psychosocial factors increase the risk of mental disorder are outlined. Implications for primary prevention as well as early intervention and treatment following a stepped care model including a variety of agents from different backgrounds are discussed. Implications to enhance research in the field are outlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social medicine is an interdisciplinary field of medicine which analyses and describes the interactions between illness, individual, society, and organisational structures of the health care system, including prevention, treatment and rehabilitation. Part of social medicine is epidemiology, including analytic epidemiology. The goal is to monitor the prevalence and spectrum of illnesses in the general population or subpopulations and to study possible risks of illness. The question is which environmental or contextual factors influence the prevalence and course of illnesses. Another area of social medicine is to evaluate patients and decide who needs social support. Important topics are inability to work, need for early retirement and pension, or disability. In this context it is important to make a distinction between functions, capacities, context and participation. There is a second paper on social medicine which covers modes of care and treatment in social medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]