【佳學(xué)基因檢測(cè)】人格障礙的行為遺傳學(xué)：為 DSM-5 中的分類和概念化提供信息

神經(jīng)內(nèi)科基因檢測(cè)費(fèi)17800說明

開會(huì)學(xué)習(xí)醫(yī)學(xué)博士年度神經(jīng)科疾病匯報(bào)《精神與神經(jīng)疾病基因易感位點(diǎn)列表及發(fā)生率分析》《Personal Disord》在.?2013 Jul;4(3):270-83.發(fā)表了一篇題目為《人格障礙的行為遺傳學(xué)：為 DSM-5 中的分類和概念化提供信息》腫瘤靶向藥物治療基因檢測(cè)臨床研究文章。該研究由Susan C South, Nathaniel J DeYoung等完成。促進(jìn)了腫瘤的正確治療與個(gè)性化用藥的發(fā)展，進(jìn)一步強(qiáng)調(diào)了基因信息檢測(cè)與分析的重要性。

神經(jīng)疾病遺傳阻斷及正確治療臨床研究?jī)?nèi)容關(guān)鍵詞：

天使綜合征,脆性X綜合征,基因治療,神經(jīng)發(fā)育障礙,雷特綜合征,SLC13A5,SLC6A1

精神科心理科疾病用藥指導(dǎo)基因檢測(cè)臨床應(yīng)用結(jié)果

人格病理學(xué)目前在診斷和統(tǒng)計(jì)手冊(cè)中通過 10 個(gè)分類人格障礙 (PD) 診斷被分為三個(gè)描述性集群。該分類系統(tǒng)因在做出臨床決策時(shí)使用離散類別和任意閾值而受到許多人的批評(píng)。為了解決這些批評(píng)，DSM-5 人格和人格障礙工作組提出了一項(xiàng)提案，該提案顯著改變了 DSM-IV PD 部分的結(jié)構(gòu)和內(nèi)容。如果這個(gè) DSM-5 工作組對(duì)實(shí)證文獻(xiàn)進(jìn)行了自己的系統(tǒng)審查，那么該審查尚未發(fā)布或廣泛提供。因此，由整個(gè)心理學(xué)界來確定建議的變化與現(xiàn)有 PD 研究結(jié)果的一致性程度。目前的文章通過解決行為遺傳學(xué)發(fā)現(xiàn)對(duì) DSM-5 中 PD 分類修訂過程的貢獻(xiàn)來加入這項(xiàng)工作。首先，我們簡(jiǎn)要回顧了 DSM 中 PD 分類的歷史。接下來，我們對(duì) PD 診斷的五個(gè)主要建議變化中的每一個(gè)進(jìn)行概述和基本原理。對(duì)于每個(gè)建議的變化，我們概述了來自行為遺傳學(xué)的可用證據(jù)以及對(duì)這些發(fā)現(xiàn)的解釋。賊后，我們總結(jié)了隨著 DSM-5 向前發(fā)展對(duì) PD 分類的考慮。對(duì)行為遺傳學(xué)文獻(xiàn)的回顧表明，DSM-5 提案的幾個(gè)特征，包括消除 4 個(gè) PD、將臨床疾病和 PD 合并在一個(gè)軸上以及實(shí)施特征評(píng)級(jí)系統(tǒng)，需要在產(chǎn)品之前進(jìn)行更多的解釋賊終確定。

神經(jīng)及精神疾病及其并發(fā)征、合并征國(guó)際數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)描述：

Personality pathology is currently captured in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual through 10 categorical personality disorder (PD) diagnoses grouped into three descriptive clusters. This classification system has been criticized by many for using discrete categories and arbitrary thresholds when making clinical decisions. To address these critiques, the DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group has put forth a proposal that significantly alters the structure and content of the DSM-IV PD section. If this DSM-5 Work Group has conducted its own systematic review of the empirical literature, this review has not been released or made widely available. As such, it is up to the psychology community at large to determine how well the suggested changes align with findings from extant PD research. The current article joins this effort by addressing the contribution of behavior genetic findings to the revision process for classification of PDs in DSM-5. First, we provide a brief review of the history of PD classification in the DSM. Next, we present an overview and rationale for each of the five major suggested changes to PD diagnoses. For each suggested change, we outline the available evidence from behavior genetics and interpretations of these findings. Finally, we offer a summary of considerations for PD classification as the DSM-5 moves forward. Review of the behavior genetics literature suggests that several features of the DSM-5 proposal, including the elimination of 4 PDs, merging clinical disorders and PDs on a single axis, and the implementation of a trait rating system, require significantly greater explication before a product is finalized.