Development & validation of a non-diagnostic mental health assessment
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Alternatives to psychiatric diagnosis - Development and validation of non-diagnostic assessment methods in mental health care
IRAS ID
155494
Contact name
Peter Kinderman
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Liverpool
Research summary
Functional psychiatric diagnoses, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, have been argued to be empirically unsound, and for many years criticised for their poor reliability and validity (e.g. Boyle, 2007). The British Psychological Society (2011) suggests that a new system of classification should begin from the bottom up, with specific experiences or problems. The proposed study aims to develop a new assessment for mental health difficulties, focusing on these specific experiences, such as low mood, or hearing voices.
An initial phase of qualitative data collection will be carried out in order to explore clinicians’ and service users’ views and uses of the current diagnostic system in mental health, and their opinions about the proposed new assessment tool and how they might use it in clinical practice (clinicians) and respond to its use in mental health services (service users). 45 clinicians (15 each of psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, and GPs), and 25 service users will be interviewed individually.
A short pilot phase involving 10 participants recruited from NHS mental health services will be used to assess the feasibility and ease of use of the new assessment. 100 participants will then be recruited as part of a quantitative data collection phase, during which the validity and reliability of the new assessment will be compared with an established 'gold standard' structured diagnostic interview. Each participant will complete the new assessment interview and the 'gold standard' structured diagnostic interview, as well as some additional questionnaires, which will provide additional measures of validity. Clinical implications of the study will include providing clinicians and researchers with an alternative method of assessing mental health difficulties without the need to use diagnostic labels.
Boyle, M. (2007). The problem with diagnosis. The Psychologist, 20(5), 290-292.
British Psychological Society (2011). Response to the American Psychiatric Association: DSM-5 Development. Leicester: British Psychological Society.
REC name
North West - Greater Manchester East Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/NW/1075
Date of REC Opinion
19 Aug 2014
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion