Which conditions should be considered as disorders in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) designation of “other specified disorders due to addictive behaviors”?

Abstract

BackgroundGambling and gaming disorders have been included as “disorders due to addictive behaviors” in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). Other problematic behaviors may be considered as “other specified disorders due to addictive behaviors (6C5Y).”MethodsNarrative review, experts' opinions.ResultsWe suggest the following meta-level criteria for considering potential addictive behaviors as fulfilling the category of “other specified disorders due to addictive behaviors”:1. Clinical relevance: Empirical evidence from multiple scientific studies demonstrates that the specific potential addictive behavior is clinically relevant and individuals experience negative consequences and functional impairments in daily life due to the problematic and potentially addictive behavior.2. Theoretical embedding: Current theories and theoretical models belonging to the field of research on addictive behaviors describe and explain most appropriately the candidate phenomenon of a potential addictive behavior.3. Empirical evidence: Data based on self-reports, clinical interviews, surveys, behavioral experiments, and, if available, biological investigations (neural, physiological, genetic) suggest that psychological (and neurobiological) mechanisms involved in other addictive behaviors are also valid for the candidate phenomenon. Varying degrees of support for problematic forms of pornography use, buying and shopping, and use of social networks are available. These conditions may fit the category of “other specified disorders due to addictive behaviors”.ConclusionIt is important not to over-pathologize everyday-life behavior while concurrently not trivializing conditions that are of clinical importance and that deserve public health considerations. The proposed meta-level-criteria may help guide both research efforts and clinical practice.

Embitterment and Posttraumatic Embitterment Disorder (PTED): An Old, Frequent, and Still Underrecognized Problem

“…Science theory tells us that diagnostic terms do not reflect the “truth” or some “reality,” but must be understood as hypothetical constructs which are qualified by operationalization, simplicity, and utility. Whether clinical syndromes are classified into separate categories does not depend on the proof of their validity in the sense of a “disease entity,” but the utility of such a category [73-76].…”

“…The PTED concept fulfils all the core criteria of utility [75, 76]. (a) It covers and organizes a broad spectrum of clinimetric data including symptoms, capacities and participation, and restrictions or impairment.…”

Empfehlungen zur Implementierung eines Beratungsangebots bei exzessivem Medienkonsum und internetbezogenen Störungen

“…Zumindest ergaben einige Untersuchungen, dass weibliche Personen vergleichsweise eher soziale Netzwerke [2] und Online-Kaufportale [13] und männliche Personen mehr Spiel-und Erotikportale [2,14] nutzen. Obwohl viele Fachleute die exzessive Nutzung digitaler sozialer Netzwerker als klinisch relevant einschätzen, ist dies noch keine anerkannte psychische Störung [15]. Bislang ist unklar, ob die exzessive Nutzung von sozialen Netzwerken einen ähnlich hohen Leidensdruck hervorruft wie anerkannte Internetnutzungsstörungen (z.…”

Addressing taxonomic challenges for Internet Use Disorders in light of changing technologies and diagnostic classifications. •

“…The paper published by Montag, Wegmann, Sariyska, Demetrovics, and Brand (2020) is timely and helps to clarify some of the current nosological jumble in relation to Internet Use Disorders (IUD). In fact, it is important to specify distinct and evidence based disorders such as those related to gaming, online pornography use, online shopping or social networks use (Brand et al, 2020;Rehbein & M€ oßle, 2013) and to avoid misleading and sometimes populistic concepts like nomophobia (A. L. S. King, Valenca, & Nardi, 2010) or selfitis (Balakrishnan & Griffiths, 2018) in the context of IUD (c. f. Starcevic, Billieux, & Schimmenti, 2018). It has to be commended that the taxonomy suggested by Montag and colleagues elegantly overcomes the dubious concept of smartphone addiction.…”