• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The journal of sexual medicine >Distress, Sexual Dysfunctions, and DSM: Dialogue at Cross Purposes?
【24h】

Distress, Sexual Dysfunctions, and DSM: Dialogue at Cross Purposes?

机译：困扰，性功能障碍和DSM：跨目的对话？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Introduction. A distress criterion was added to the diagnostic criteria of sexual dysfunctions in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition (DSM-IV; 1994). This decision was neither based on empirical evidence, nor on an open, academic, or public debate about its necessity. As a result, this decision has been disputed ever since the publication of DSM-IV. Aim. In this article, the necessity to include or exclude the distress criterion from the diagnostic criteria of sexual dysfunctions is critically evaluated, illustrating its consequences for both sex research and clinical practice. Methods. Apart from careful reading of relevant sections in DSM-II, DSM-III, DSM-IV, DSM-IV Text Revision, and articles about and online proposals for DSM-5, an extensive PubMed literature search was performed including words as "sexual dysfunction"/"sexual difficulty"/"sexual disorder,""distress"/"clinical significance,""diagnostic criteria," and "DSM"/"Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders." Based on analysis of the references of the retrieved works, more relevant articles were also found. Main Outcome Measures. Arguments for or against removal of distress from the diagnostic criteria of sexual dysfunctions by former and current members of the DSM Task Force and Work Group on Sexual Disorders, as well as by other authors in the field of sex research, are reviewed and critically assessed. Results. Proponents and opponents of including the distress criterion in the diagnostic criteria of sexual dysfunctions appear to be unresponsive to each others' arguments. To prevent the debate from becoming an endlessly repetitive discussion, it is first necessary to acknowledge that this is a philosophical debate about the nature, function, and goals of the diagnosis of a sexual dysfunction. Conclusions. Given the current lack of data supporting either the retention or removal of the distress criterion, distress should always be taken into account in future research on sexual dysfunctions. Such forthcoming data should increase our understanding of the association between distress and sexual difficulties. ? 2012 International Society for Sexual Medicine.
机译：介绍。在《精神障碍诊断和统计手册》第四版（DSM-IV; 1994年）中，将性骚扰标准添加到性功能障碍的诊断标准中。该决定既不是基于经验证据，也不是关于其必要性的公开，学术或公开辩论。结果，自DSM-IV发布以来，该决定一直存在争议。目标。本文对性功能障碍的诊断标准中包括或排除痛苦标准的必要性进行了严格评估，以说明其对性研究和临床实践的影响。方法。除了仔细阅读DSM-II，DSM-III，DSM-IV，DSM-IV文本修订以及有关DSM-5的文章和在线建议的相关章节外，还进行了广泛的PubMed文献检索，包括“性功能障碍”一词。 “ /”性困难” /“性障碍”，“困扰” /“临床意义”，“诊断标准”和“ DSM” /“精神障碍诊断和统计手册”。在对检索到的作品的参考文献进行分析的基础上，还发现了更多相关的文章。主要观察指标。 DSM工作组和性病工作组的前任和现任成员以及性研究领域的其他作者对性功能障碍诊断标准中消除或消除痛苦的论据进行了审查和严格评估。结果。支持者和反对者将痛苦标准纳入性功能障碍的诊断标准中，似乎对彼此的论点没有反应。为了防止辩论成为无休止的重复讨论，首先必须承认这是关于性功能障碍诊断的性质，功能和目标的哲学辩论。结论。鉴于目前缺乏支持保留或消除痛苦标准的数据，在有关性功能障碍的未来研究中应始终考虑痛苦。这些即将到来的数据应该增加我们对痛苦和性困难之间联系的理解。 ？ 2012年国际性医学学会。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号