IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v8y2016i1p85-87.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identical symptomatology but different diagnosis: Treatment implications of an OCD versus schizophrenia diagnosis

Author

Listed:
  • Noel Hunter
  • Kimberly Glazier
  • Lata K. McGinn

Abstract

Background: Individuals with identical symptomatology may receive conflicting diagnoses, potentially leading to different treatments. The aims of this study were to assess diagnostic impressions and treatment recommendations for obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) versus schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (SSD).Methods: Participants (N = 82) were recruited from accredited doctoral programs. All participants were randomized to assess diagnostic impressions and treatment recommendations for 15 vignettes. These were measured across three separate testing sessions.Results: Large discrepancies in treatment recommendations were found. All participants who selected OCD recommended psychotherapy while only 15.4% of participants who identified the same vignette as schizophrenia suggested psychotherapy. More than half the participants who reported schizophrenia selected antipsychotics as the primary response; medication was not a primary recommendation when the vignette was identified as OCD.Conclusion: Symptoms conceptualized as SSDs were recommended medication; those same symptoms conceptualized as OCD were recommended psychotherapy. Greater awareness regarding the efficacy of psychosocial treatments for SSDs is needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Noel Hunter & Kimberly Glazier & Lata K. McGinn, 2016. "Identical symptomatology but different diagnosis: Treatment implications of an OCD versus schizophrenia diagnosis," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 85-87, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:85-87
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2015.1044462
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2015.1044462
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2015.1044462?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:85-87. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPSY20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.