ICD-10 includes a craving criterion for alcohol dependence while DSM-IV does not. Little is known about whether craving fits with or improves the DSM-IV criteria set for alcohol-use disorders.

Data were derived from current drinkers (n=18 352) in the 1991–1992 National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey (NLAES), a nationally representative survey of US adults >17 years of age. The Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule was used to assess the eleven DSM-IV dependence and abuse criteria, and alcohol craving. Exploratory factor, item response theory, and regression analyses were used to evaluate the psychometric properties and concurrent validity of DSM-based alcohol disorder criteria with the addition of alcohol craving.

The past 12-month prevalence of craving was 1.3%. Craving formed part of a unidimensional latent variable that included existing DSM-IV criteria. Craving demonstrated high severity on the alcohol-use disorder continuum, resulting in an improved dimensional model with greater discriminatory ability compared with current DSM-IV criteria. Correlates of the diagnosis did not change with the addition of craving, and past 12-month craving was associated with prior alcohol dependence, depression, and earlier age of alcohol disorder onset among those with current DSM-IV alcohol dependence.

The addition of craving to the existing DSM-IV criteria yields a continuous measure that better differentiates individuals with and without alcohol problems along the alcohol-use disorder continuum. Few individuals are newly diagnosed with alcohol dependence given the addition of craving, indicating construct validity but redundancy with existing criteria.

DSM-IV and ICD-10 are atheoretical and largely descriptive. Although this achieves good reliability, the validity of diagnoses can be increased by an understanding of risk factors and other clinical features. In an effort to group mental disorders on this basis, five clusters have been proposed. We now consider the second cluster, namely neurodevelopmental disorders.

We reviewed the literature in relation to 11 validating criteria proposed by a DSM-V Task Force Study Group.

This cluster reflects disorders of neurodevelopment rather than a ‘childhood’ disorders cluster. It comprises disorders subcategorized in DSM-IV and ICD-10 as Mental Retardation; Learning, Motor, and Communication Disorders; and Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Although these disorders seem to be heterogeneous, they share similarities on some risk and clinical factors. There is evidence of a neurodevelopmental genetic phenotype, the disorders have an early emerging and continuing course, and all have salient cognitive symptoms. Within-cluster co-morbidity also supports grouping these disorders together. Other childhood disorders currently listed in DSM-IV share similarities with the Externalizing and Emotional clusters. These include Conduct Disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Separation Anxiety Disorder. The Tic, Eating/Feeding and Elimination disorders, and Selective Mutisms were allocated to the ‘Not Yet Assigned’ group.

Neurodevelopmental disorders meet some of the salient criteria proposed by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to suggest a classification cluster.

In an effort to group mental disorders on the basis of etiology, five clusters have been proposed. Here we consider the validity of the cluster comprising selected psychotic and related disorders.

A group of diagnostic entities classified under schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders in DSM-IV-TR were assigned to this cluster and the bordering disorders, bipolar (BD) and schizotypal personality disorders (SPD), were included. We then reviewed the literature in relation to 11 validating criteria proposed by the DSM-V Task Force Study Group.

Relevant comparisons on the 11 spectrum criteria are rare for the included disorders except for schizophrenia and the two border conditions, BD and SPD. The core psychosis group is congruent at the level of shared psychotic psychopathology and response to antipsychotic medication. BD and SPD are exceptions in that psychosis is not typical in BD-II disorder and frank psychosis is excluded in SPD. There is modest similarity between schizophrenia and BD relating to risk factors, neural substrates, cognition and endophenotypes, but key differences are noted. There is greater support for a spectrum relationship of SPD and schizophrenia. Antecedent temperament, an important validator for other groupings, has received little empirical study in the various psychotic disorders.

The DSM-IV-TR grouping of psychotic disorders is supported by tradition and shared psychopathology, but few data exist across these diagnoses relating to the 11 spectrum criteria. The case for including BD is modest, and the relationship of BD to other mood disorders is addressed elsewhere. Evidence is stronger for inclusion of SPD, but the relationship with other personality disorders along the 11 criteria is not addressed and the absence of psychosis presents a conceptual problem. There are no data along the 11 spectrum criteria that are decisive for a cluster based on etiology, and inclusion of BD and SPD is questionable.

The extant major psychiatric classifications, DSM-IV and ICD-10, are purportedly atheoretical and largely descriptive. Although this achieves good reliability, the validity of a medical diagnosis is greatly enhanced by an understanding of both risk factors and clinical history. In an effort to group mental disorders on the basis of risk factors and clinical manifestations, five clusters have been proposed. The purpose of this paper is to consider the position of bipolar disorder (BPD), which could be either with the psychoses, or with emotional disorders, or in a separate cluster.

We reviewed the literature on BPD, unipolar depression (UPD) and schizophrenia in relation to 11 validating criteria proposed by the DSM-V Task Force Study Group, and then summarized similarities and differences between BPD and schizophrenia on the one hand, and UPD on the other.

There are differences, often substantial and never trivial, for 10 of the 11 validators between BPD and UPD. There are also important differences between BPD and schizophrenia.

BPD has previously been classified together with UPD, but this is the least justifiable place for it. If it is to be recruited to a ‘psychotic cluster’, there are several important respects in which it differs from schizophrenia, so the cluster would have a division within it. The alternative would be to allow it to be in an intermediate position in a cluster of its own.

The extant major psychiatric classifications DSM-IV, and ICD-10, are atheoretical and largely descriptive. Although this achieves good reliability, the validity of a medical diagnosis would be greatly enhanced by an understanding of risk factors and clinical manifestations. In an effort to group mental disorders on the basis of aetiology, five clusters have been proposed. This paper considers the validity of the fourth cluster, emotional disorders, within that proposal.

We reviewed the literature in relation to 11 validating criteria proposed by a Study Group of the DSM-V Task Force, as applied to the cluster of emotional disorders.

An emotional cluster of disorders identified using the 11 validators is feasible. Negative affectivity is the defining feature of the emotional cluster. Although there are differences between disorders in the remaining validating criteria, there are similarities that support the feasibility of an emotional cluster. Strong intra-cluster co-morbidity may reflect the action of common risk factors and also shared higher-order symptom dimensions in these emotional disorders.

Emotional disorders meet many of the salient criteria proposed by the Study Group of the DSM-V Task Force to suggest a classification cluster.

In an effort to group mental disorders on the basis of aetiology, five clusters have been proposed. In this paper, we consider the validity of the first cluster, neurocognitive disorders, within this proposal. These disorders are categorized as ‘Dementia, Delirium, and Amnestic and Other Cognitive Disorders’ in DSM-IV and ‘Organic, including Symptomatic Mental Disorders’ in ICD-10.

We reviewed the literature in relation to 11 validating criteria proposed by a Study Group of the DSM-V Task Force as applied to the cluster of neurocognitive disorders.

‘Neurocognitive’ replaces the previous terms ‘cognitive’ and ‘organic’ used in DSM-IV and ICD-10 respectively as the descriptor for disorders in this cluster. Although cognitive/organic problems are present in other disorders, this cluster distinguishes itself by the demonstrable neural substrate abnormalities and the salience of cognitive symptoms and deficits. Shared biomarkers, co-morbidity and course offer less persuasive evidence for a valid cluster of neurocognitive disorders. The occurrence of these disorders subsequent to normal brain development sets this cluster apart from neurodevelopmental disorders. The aetiology of the disorders is varied, but the neurobiological underpinnings are better understood than for mental disorders in any other cluster.

Neurocognitive disorders meet some of the salient criteria proposed by the Study Group of the DSM-V Task Force to suggest a classification cluster. Further developments in the aetiopathogenesis of these disorders will enhance the clinical utility of this cluster.

The organization of mental disorders into 16 DSM-IV and 10 ICD-10 chapters is complex and based on clinical presentation. We explored the feasibility of a more parsimonious meta-structure based on both risk factors and clinical factors.

Most DSM-IV disorders were allocated to one of five clusters as a starting premise. Teams of experts then reviewed the literature to determine within-cluster similarities on 11 predetermined validating criteria. Disorders were included and excluded as determined by the available data. These data are intended to inform the grouping of disorders in the DSM-V and ICD-11 processes.

The final clusters were neurocognitive (identified principally by neural substrate abnormalities), neurodevelopmental (identified principally by early and continuing cognitive deficits), psychosis (identified principally by clinical features and biomarkers for information processing deficits), emotional (identified principally by the temperamental antecedent of negative emotionality), and externalizing (identified principally by the temperamental antecedent of disinhibition).

Large groups of disorders were found to share risk factors and also clinical picture. There could be advantages for clinical practice, public administration and research from the adoption of such an organizing principle.

The role played by anxiety in the history of psychiatric epidemiology has not been well recognized. Such lack of understanding retarded the incremental growth of psychiatric research in general populations. It seems useful to look back on this history while deliberations are being carried out about how anxiety will be presented in DSM-V.

Drawing on the literature and our own research, we examined work that was carried out during and after the Second World War by a Research Branch of the United States War Department, by the Stirling County Study, and by the Midtown Manhattan Study. The differential influences of Meyerian psychobiology and Freudian psychoanalysis are noted.

The instruments developed in the early epidemiologic endeavors used questions about nervousness, palpitations, sweating, trembling, shortness of breath, upset stomach, etc. These symptoms are important features of what the clinical literature called ‘manifest’, ‘free-floating’ or ‘chronic anxiety’. A useful descriptive name is ‘autonomic anxiety’.

Although not focusing on specific circumstances as in Panic and Phobic disorders, a non-specific form of autonomic anxiety is a common, disabling and usually chronic disorder that received empirical verification in studies of several community populations. It is suggested that two types of general anxiety may need to be recognized, one dominated by excessive worry and feelings of stress, as in the current DSM-IV definition of Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), and another emphasizing frequent unexplainable autonomic fearfulness, as in the early epidemiologic studies.