To the Editor.—
We welcome the comments on our Archives' article of February 1980 (37:209-221, 1980) conveyed by Weissman and Klerman (37:229-230, 1980). Our commentators partially identify several differences, both apparent and real, between us related to matters of nomenclature in psychiatric epidemiology. These differences revolve around (1) questions of historical fact, (2) issues of theory, and (3) critical problems about situationally limited research instruments.
In the realm of historical fact, six corrections are in order.1. Weissman and Klerman assert, "Psychiatric epidemiology, along with other fields of mental health research during the immediate post-World War II period, rejected the classic 19th century view of diagnosis and classification associated with Kraepelin and Bleuler, and adopted the view that there was a continuum (or spectrum) from mental health through mental illness." One of the present responders (L.S.) has been a researcher and teacher in academic psychiatry since the issuance of DSM-I
Srole L, Fischer AK. Debate on Psychiatric Epidemiology. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1980;37(12):1421–1423. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1980.01780250107013
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: