Can Neurosis Become Psychosis? What the Historical Distinction Does—and Does Not Mean
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 30, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Can neurosis become psychosis? In the historical language of psychiatry, neurosis and psychosis were usually treated as contrasting forms of psychopathology, not as two mandatory stages of one disease. In modern psychiatry, the question has to be translated into current diagnostic terms because neurosis is no longer a single DSM-5-TR diagnosis and ICD-11 does not use one overarching neurosis category. A person who has anxiety, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, depressive symptoms, trauma-related symptoms, or another condition that earlier clinicians might have called neurotic can later experience psychotic symptoms. Clinicians would assess those psychotic symptoms in their own right. They would not ordinarily describe the event as “the neurosis turning into psychosis.”
That distinction matters because the old formula can hide several very different clinical situations. A person may be experiencing a first episode of psychosis, a mood disorder with psychotic features, a substance- or medication-related psychotic state, psychosis associated with a medical or neurological condition, psychotic-like experiences that do not meet criteria for a psychotic disorder, or a combination of nonpsychotic and psychotic symptoms. The National Institute of Mental Health defines psychosis as a collection of symptoms involving some loss of contact with reality and notes that psychosis can occur in multiple mental and medical conditions. The modern task is therefore to identify the actual symptoms, their timing, context, severity, and causes rather than to place someone on an assumed neurosis-to-psychosis ladder.
The Short Answer: Neurosis Is Not a Pre-Psychotic Stage
The clearest answer is that historical neurosis should not be treated as a recognized pre-psychotic stage. The word neurosis covered changing and heterogeneous clinical territory across different eras. In many twentieth-century formulations, a central contrast was that people described as neurotic remained broadly in contact with shared reality, while psychosis involved disturbances such as delusions, hallucinations, disorganized thought, or more marked impairment of reality testing. That contrast helped clinicians organize cases, but it did not establish a biological sequence in which one category naturally matured into the other.
Modern diagnostic systems have moved away from that umbrella architecture. The American Psychiatric Association’s history of the DSM describes DSM-III, published in 1980, as a major shift toward explicit diagnostic criteria and greater neutrality about presumed causes. Historical analyses by Bayer and Spitzer and by Frances and colleagues document how neurosis lost its central organizing role in American psychiatric classification. Once the umbrella was dismantled, the question “Can neurosis become psychosis?” stopped corresponding to a defined transition between two current DSM diagnoses.
Why the Historical Distinction Still Creates Confusion
The confusion comes from the fact that “neurosis” and “psychosis” once functioned as large organizing categories. Their exact meanings changed repeatedly, but by the twentieth century many psychiatric and psychoanalytic texts treated them as major poles of mental disorder. That history encourages a simple picture: neurosis equals distress with intact reality, psychosis equals loss of reality, and worsening neurosis eventually crosses a line into psychosis. The historical record is more complicated.
The concepts did not begin as a matched pair. Neurosis originated in an eighteenth-century medical vocabulary of nervous disease. Psychosis was introduced later and also changed meaning over time. Psychiatrist and historian Martin Bürgy’s historical review of the concept of psychosis traces the gradual differentiation of psychosis from neurosis and shows that the boundary was shaped by changing psychiatric theories, phenomenology, and classification practices. A definition taken from one era therefore cannot safely be projected backward or forward as though the terms had always meant the same thing.
What “Neurosis” Meant Historically
Neurosis was never one stable disease entity. William Cullen used the term in the eighteenth century for a broad class of nervous diseases. Nineteenth-century medicine progressively separated conditions with identifiable neurological pathology from disorders regarded as functional or otherwise difficult to localize. Psychoanalysis then gave neurosis a theory-specific meaning involving conflict, anxiety, defense, repression, and symptom formation. Twentieth-century psychiatric manuals also used neurotic diagnoses and groupings, but their categories were tied to the classification system of the period.
For a full account of those changes, see Neurosis: What It Means Today, Symptoms, History, and Modern Diagnoses. The crucial point for the present question is that “neurosis” could encompass anxiety, phobic symptoms, obsessions and compulsions, depressive symptoms, conversion and dissociative phenomena, somatic complaints, trauma-related symptoms, and other presentations depending on the time and theoretical school. Because the old umbrella was heterogeneous, no single modern risk trajectory can be assigned to “neurosis” as a whole.
What Psychosis Means in Modern Clinical Language
Psychosis is still a clinically meaningful term, but it is better understood as a syndrome or set of symptoms than as one single disease. According to NIMH’s current overview, psychosis involves some loss of contact with reality. Typical features include delusions, hallucinations, disrupted thinking and perception, incoherent or confused speech, and difficulty recognizing what is real. Psychosis can appear in schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, severe depression, some neurological and other medical conditions, and states related to substances, medications, or severe sleep deprivation.
This is why psychosis and schizophrenia are not synonyms. Schizophrenia is one diagnosis in which psychosis can occur. Psychotic symptoms can also occur outside schizophrenia, and some people experience an episode of psychosis without later receiving a schizophrenia diagnosis. The question “Has this person become psychotic?” therefore needs to be separated from “Does this person have schizophrenia?” and from the historical question “Would an earlier clinician have called the previous condition a neurosis?”
The Historical Neurosis–Psychosis Divide
In many later nineteenth- and twentieth-century formulations, the distinction between neurosis and psychosis involved several linked ideas: the degree of reality testing, the degree of insight, the organization of thought and personality, the severity of functional impairment, and competing assumptions about cause. These were influential clinical distinctions, especially in psychodynamic psychiatry, yet their content varied across authors and periods. They should be described as historical frameworks rather than imported wholesale into DSM-5-TR or ICD-11.
Reality testing was one important marker
A common historical shorthand was that the person with neurosis remained broadly oriented to consensual reality and often recognized symptoms as troubling, irrational, or unwanted, whereas psychosis involved a more substantial disturbance in the person’s relationship to reality. This distinction remains intuitively useful when explaining why a panic attack, an intrusive thought, or a phobia is not automatically psychosis. It becomes misleading when treated as an absolute switch. Insight can vary, symptoms can overlap, and modern diagnosis considers the full clinical picture.
Severity was not the whole distinction
Another common misunderstanding is that psychosis simply means “very severe neurosis.” Historically, some writers did arrange disorders along a severity continuum, while others regarded neurosis and psychosis as qualitatively different. Modern classification does not diagnose psychosis merely because anxiety, depression, compulsions, or distress have become extremely intense. A person can have severe nonpsychotic illness. Conversely, a psychotic symptom can appear in a person whose overall functioning does not fit an old picture of global deterioration.
Theories of cause also differed
Older distinctions often carried assumptions about etiology: psychological conflict, constitution, degeneration, organic disease, heredity, trauma, or other mechanisms. These assumptions changed with the theoretical school. DSM-III’s move toward more operational diagnostic criteria deliberately reduced dependence on contested etiological theories. Bayer and Spitzer’s historical account shows how the dispute over neurosis became part of a much larger conflict about psychodynamics, descriptive diagnosis, and the goals of psychiatric classification.
Why “Neurosis Turns Into Psychosis” Is Misleading Today
The phrase suggests one entity transforming into another. Modern clinical practice usually encounters a different set of possibilities. The earlier symptoms may have belonged to a specific anxiety, mood, obsessive-compulsive, trauma-related, dissociative, somatic, personality, or other condition. New psychotic symptoms may then appear for reasons that require separate assessment. The clinically useful sequence is therefore “earlier symptoms, then a new or changing presentation,” not “neurosis converted into psychosis.”
This distinction is more than terminology. If someone assumes that all worsening anxiety is a slide toward psychosis, ordinary fluctuations in panic, intrusive thoughts, derealization, or insomnia can become frightening in themselves. If someone assumes the opposite—that a long history of nonpsychotic symptoms makes psychosis impossible—new hallucinations, delusions, or disorganization can be overlooked. Modern assessment avoids both errors by focusing on the symptoms that are present now and on their differential diagnosis.
What Can Actually Happen Instead of a Simple “Conversion”
1. A nonpsychotic disorder and psychosis can coexist
Anxiety, depressive symptoms, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, and trauma-related symptoms can occur in people who also have psychotic symptoms. Co-occurrence does not prove that one condition transformed into the other. It may reflect shared vulnerabilities, one disorder complicating another, symptoms emerging at different times, or separate diagnoses that need to be evaluated together.
Population research supports this more nuanced picture. In a study of young adults, Varghese and colleagues found that psychotic-like experiences were reported more often by people with major depression and anxiety disorders than by well participants. That finding does not mean depression or anxiety routinely “becomes psychosis.” It shows that psychotic-like experiences are not confined to people diagnosed with a primary psychotic disorder and that the old categorical gulf between “neurotic” and “psychotic” phenomena can be too simple.
2. A mood disorder can include psychotic features
Psychosis can occur during severe mood episodes. NIMH specifically notes that psychosis may be a symptom of bipolar disorder or severe depression as well as schizophrenia. In that situation, the clinical question concerns the relationship between psychotic symptoms and the mood episode: their timing, content, duration, and whether they persist outside the mood syndrome. An older record that called earlier distress “depressive neurosis” does not determine the modern diagnosis.
3. An emerging psychotic disorder may first look nonspecific
Before a first episode of psychosis, some people have nonspecific changes such as sleep disruption, social withdrawal, anxiety, reduced functioning, suspiciousness, or difficulty thinking clearly. NIMH lists several of these as possible warning signs. They are not specific enough to diagnose impending psychosis by themselves. Anxiety and insomnia are common in many conditions and in people without a psychotic disorder. Their meaning changes when they occur with more specific psychotic phenomena, progressive deterioration, or a broader pattern recognized in clinical assessment.
4. Psychotic symptoms can have substance, medication, medical, or neurological causes
A new hallucination, delusion, or severe change in thinking should not automatically be interpreted as a psychiatric progression. NIMH’s psychosis guidance notes possible contributions from sleep deprivation, prescription medications, alcohol or drug misuse, and neurological or other medical illnesses. The differential diagnosis therefore includes medical history, medication and substance exposure, sleep, neurological symptoms, mood state, and the timing of symptom onset.
5. The first label may have been incomplete
Clinical descriptions can change as more information becomes available. Early in an illness, a person may present mainly with anxiety, low mood, insomnia, or obsessive concerns. Later symptoms may clarify a diagnosis that was not yet apparent. This is not unique to psychosis and it does not mean the first symptoms “caused” the later ones. It means diagnosis is longitudinal: clinicians sometimes need time and repeated assessment to understand how a presentation is organized.
Psychotic-Like Experiences Are Not the Same as a Psychotic Disorder
Modern research also complicates the old binary because psychotic-like experiences exist on a spectrum of severity and persistence. People in the general population can report unusual perceptual experiences or belief-like experiences without meeting criteria for a psychotic disorder. A 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis by Staines and colleagues found that psychotic experiences occur in the general population and that persistence is clinically relevant. The important variables include frequency, persistence, distress, functional impact, context, and the presence of other symptoms.
Longitudinal evidence shows why this needs careful interpretation. A systematic review and meta-analysis by Kaymaz and colleagues found that subthreshold psychotic experiences in representative population samples were associated with a higher subsequent risk of clinical psychotic outcomes, while the absolute annual risk remained low in those unselected samples. That evidence concerns psychotic experiences themselves. It should not be generalized into a claim that ordinary anxiety, “neurotic” personality, or any historical neurosis label is a prodrome of psychosis.
Can Severe Anxiety Become Psychosis?
Severe anxiety can be overwhelming, but intensity alone does not redefine anxiety as psychosis. Panic can involve fear of losing control, catastrophic interpretations, dizziness, depersonalization, derealization, and a sense that the world feels strange or unreal. These experiences can be frightening while remaining phenomenologically different from fixed delusions, hallucinations, or a broader loss of shared reality. A clinician distinguishes them by asking what the person is experiencing, what they believe about the experience, how convinced they are, whether perceptions occur without an external stimulus, and how thought and behavior have changed.
At the same time, anxiety can occur before, during, or alongside psychosis. The Varghese et al. population study found more psychotic-like experiences among people with anxiety disorders, and NIMH notes that anxiety can accompany psychosis. Those observations support careful assessment of actual psychotic symptoms. They do not establish an inevitable pathway from anxiety disorder to psychotic disorder.
Can OCD Become Psychosis?
Obsessions and delusions can sometimes be confused because both involve strongly held or recurrent mental content. In classic presentations, an obsession is experienced as intrusive and unwanted and often leads to attempts to neutralize anxiety, while a delusion is a belief held with a different relationship to evidence and shared reality. Real clinical presentations can be less tidy, which is why differential diagnosis should examine conviction, insight, resistance, compulsive behavior, perceptual experiences, thought organization, and the broader syndrome rather than rely on a single word.
OCD and psychotic disorders can also coexist. A 2023 systematic review with meta-analysis found substantial rates of obsessive-compulsive symptoms and OCD in people at risk for psychosis and in first-episode psychosis samples. In that meta-analysis, the presence of obsessive-compulsive symptoms was not associated with a statistically significant difference in risk of conversion to psychosis within the studied risk-state samples. This is another example of why comorbidity should not be described as one disorder automatically transforming into the other. For a fuller current comparison, see OCD Differential Diagnosis: What Conditions Can Look Like OCD?.
Can Neurosis Become Schizophrenia?
The same translation rule applies. “Neurosis” is a historical umbrella term; schizophrenia is a current diagnosis with its own diagnostic requirements. A history of symptoms that an earlier clinician might have called neurotic does not itself establish a pathway to schizophrenia. If psychosis develops, clinicians assess the psychotic episode and its course, including whether symptoms fit schizophrenia, a mood disorder with psychotic features, another psychotic disorder, a substance- or medication-induced condition, or a medical cause.
Psychosis also does not automatically mean schizophrenia. NIMH explicitly notes that a person can experience psychosis without ever being diagnosed with schizophrenia or another specific mental disorder. The diagnostic meaning of a first psychotic episode emerges from its duration, pattern, associated mood symptoms, functional course, exposures, medical context, and longitudinal follow-up.
Reality Testing Is Clinically Important, but It Is Not a Single On-Off Switch
The phrase “reality testing” is one of the most durable legacies of the neurosis–psychosis distinction. It remains useful as a descriptive idea: clinicians care whether a person can evaluate perceptions and beliefs against shared evidence, revise interpretations, and recognize that an unusual experience may come from their own mind. Psychosis often involves impaired ability to make those distinctions. Yet insight and conviction vary across people, across symptoms, and across time.
A person can question a hallucination, partially doubt a paranoid interpretation, or retain good functioning in some areas while having a psychotic symptom. A person with a nonpsychotic disorder can also become highly convinced of a feared interpretation without meeting criteria for a psychotic disorder. This is why contemporary assessment does not classify a case solely by asking whether “reality testing is intact.” The nature of the experience, degree of conviction, persistence, associated symptoms, and clinical context all matter.
DSM-5-TR and ICD-11 Do Not Use a Neurosis-to-Psychosis Progression Model
The current American diagnostic manual is DSM-5-TR. The American Psychiatric Association describes DSM-5-TR as the current text revision of DSM-5, published in 2022. It organizes recognized mental disorders into specific diagnostic categories and criteria. “Neurosis” is not a current DSM-5-TR diagnosis. That means there is no DSM-5-TR criterion set for “conversion of neurosis to psychosis.” The relevant assessment begins with the current symptoms and the diagnostic categories that can account for them.
ICD history has to be handled separately. ICD-10 retained the broad heading “neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders,” but ICD-11’s Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Requirements use a reorganized contemporary architecture. The WHO manual is designed for the identification and diagnosis of current mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders. Carrying the ICD-10 umbrella forward as though it were the current ICD-11 structure would create a classification error.
For the full edition-specific classification question, see Is Neurosis Still a Diagnosis? DSM-5-TR, ICD-11, and Modern Psychiatry. The practical consequence here is straightforward: neither current framework asks whether a diagnosed “neurosis” has crossed a formal threshold and become “psychosis.”
What a Historical Record Saying “Neurosis” Can—and Cannot—Tell You
An old diagnosis of neurosis can be clinically and historically informative. It can show how a physician, psychiatrist, psychoanalyst, military service, hospital, or national coding system understood a presentation at a particular time. It can identify a lineage—for example, anxiety neurosis, obsessional neurosis, depressive neurosis, traumatic neurosis, or conversion neurosis. It can also help explain the treatments and expectations that were attached to that label.
The label cannot by itself establish a current diagnosis, quantify present risk of psychosis, or prove that later psychosis was a progression of the earlier condition. To interpret a historical record responsibly, the original symptoms, diagnostic manual or theoretical tradition, date, clinician’s language, treatment context, and later course all need to be considered. The older term may overlap with several modern categories rather than map to one.
How to Tell Worsening Distress From Possible Psychosis
There is no online rule that can reliably separate every severe nonpsychotic state from emerging psychosis. Certain changes, however, deserve direct clinical assessment because they are characteristic of psychosis or early psychosis. NIMH highlights hallucinations, delusions, confused or incoherent speech, difficulty telling reality from fantasy, suspicious or unusually intense ideas, marked sleep disruption, social withdrawal, decline in self-care, and a sudden drop in work or school functioning among relevant symptoms and warning signs.
The pattern matters more than one isolated item. Sleep loss can occur with anxiety. Social withdrawal can occur with depression. Suspiciousness can arise in trauma-related states. Unusual perceptual experiences can occur outside psychotic disorders. A clinician looks for the combination, onset, persistence, severity, degree of reality distortion, mood state, substance and medication exposure, medical causes, and functional change.
When Clinical Assessment Becomes Especially Important
Prompt assessment is appropriate when a person develops new hallucinations, fixed beliefs that appear clearly disconnected from shared evidence, markedly disorganized thinking or speech, severe confusion, major difficulty distinguishing internal experiences from external events, abrupt deterioration in self-care or functioning, or a combination of these changes. Assessment is also important when unusual experiences are persistent, escalating, highly distressing, associated with dangerous behavior, or occurring after major sleep loss, medication changes, substance use, or new neurological or medical symptoms.
Early assessment does not presuppose a schizophrenia diagnosis. Its purpose is to clarify what is happening and to identify treatable causes. NIMH emphasizes that early treatment of psychosis is associated with better recovery and describes coordinated specialty care as the standard approach for early psychosis in the United States. This article does not attempt to reproduce a psychosis treatment guide; its function is to translate the historical neurosis–psychosis question into a clinically useful modern one.
What the Historical Distinction Still Helps Us Understand
The old neurosis–psychosis contrast remains useful in the history of ideas. It shows how psychiatry tried to organize differences in insight, reality contact, symptom form, severity, personality organization, presumed cause, and prognosis. It also helps explain why older books and case records use vocabulary that sounds familiar while referring to categories that no longer exist in the same form.
The distinction also preserves a valuable clinical intuition: intense suffering does not automatically equal psychosis. A person can experience severe anxiety, obsessions, phobias, depression, dissociation, or bodily distress while remaining broadly anchored in shared reality. Conversely, psychosis deserves specific attention because hallucinations, delusions, disorganization, and impaired reality appraisal introduce different diagnostic questions. Modern psychiatry keeps that clinical sensitivity while abandoning the idea that every case belongs permanently to one side of an all-purpose neurosis–psychosis divide.
What the Historical Distinction Does Not Mean
It does not mean that neurosis is a current mild diagnosis and psychosis is its severe version. It does not mean that enough anxiety inevitably produces psychosis. It does not mean that a person with OCD, panic, depression, trauma-related symptoms, or another nonpsychotic condition is simply waiting to cross into a psychotic category. It does not mean that psychosis equals schizophrenia. It also does not mean that someone with a long history of anxiety or other nonpsychotic symptoms cannot later experience psychosis.
The historically accurate and clinically useful formulation is narrower: neurosis and psychosis were influential, changing categories whose contrast often included reality testing; modern diagnosis has replaced the neurosis umbrella with more specific categories; and psychotic symptoms are assessed directly when they occur, regardless of what older terminology might have been used for previous symptoms.
Practical Interpretation for a Modern Reader
If you encounter the statement “neurosis can become psychosis,” first ask what the writer means by neurosis. Is the source describing a historical psychiatric category, a psychoanalytic concept, an ICD-10 grouping, an older clinical diagnosis, or simply severe anxiety in everyday language? Then ask what “psychosis” refers to: a symptom syndrome, a first psychotic episode, schizophrenia, a mood disorder with psychotic features, or another condition. Without those clarifications, the sentence is too ambiguous to carry a modern clinical meaning.
For personal symptoms, replace the old question with more concrete ones. What exactly changed? Are there new hallucinations or fixed unusual beliefs? Is thinking or speech becoming disorganized? Has the person’s ability to distinguish internal experiences from external events changed? Are sleep, substances, medications, mood episodes, neurological symptoms, or medical illness relevant? Has functioning declined? Those questions lead toward an actual assessment; the historical label “neurosis” does not.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can anxiety turn into psychosis?
Anxiety is not classified as a routine preliminary stage of psychosis. Anxiety can coexist with psychosis, can be present before a psychotic episode, and is associated with psychotic-like experiences in some population research. Those facts do not establish that an anxiety disorder itself transforms into a psychotic disorder. New hallucinations, delusions, disorganization, or major difficulty recognizing reality should be assessed as new clinical phenomena.
Can stress trigger psychosis?
Stress is one factor that can interact with vulnerability, but psychosis has no single cause. NIMH describes psychosis as arising from a complex combination of factors and notes associations with stress or trauma, mental disorders, medical and neurological illness, sleep deprivation, medications, and substance use. A stressful event therefore cannot by itself establish why psychosis occurred in a particular person.
Can panic attacks become psychosis?
Panic attacks can produce intense fear, catastrophic thoughts, derealization, and a feeling of losing control. Those experiences do not automatically constitute psychosis. If a person develops hallucinations, fixed delusional beliefs, marked thought disorganization, or sustained difficulty distinguishing reality from internal experience, the presentation warrants a separate assessment rather than being assumed to be “just panic.”
Can OCD become psychosis?
OCD and psychotic disorders can coexist, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms are seen in some people with psychosis or psychosis-risk states. The available evidence does not support treating OCD as though it ordinarily converts into psychosis. The modern task is to distinguish obsessions, compulsions, degree of insight, delusional beliefs, hallucinations, and other symptoms and then diagnose the actual syndrome or syndromes present.
Can neurosis become schizophrenia?
A historical neurosis label does not define a recognized progression to schizophrenia. Someone previously described as neurotic can later develop psychosis or schizophrenia, just as someone with many other prior psychiatric or nonpsychiatric histories can. The later diagnosis depends on current criteria and longitudinal course, not on the fact that an older label once contained the word neurosis.
Does loss of insight automatically mean psychosis?
Insight is clinically important, but it is not an all-or-none diagnostic test. People can have varying degrees of insight across many psychiatric conditions, and people with psychotic symptoms can also have partial awareness that an experience may not be real. Clinicians assess the content and conviction of beliefs, perceptual experiences, thought organization, behavior, functional change, and the overall syndrome.
Does psychosis always mean schizophrenia?
No. Psychosis can occur in schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, severe depression, substance- or medication-related states, neurological and medical conditions, and other contexts. NIMH also notes that a person can experience psychosis without ultimately being diagnosed with schizophrenia. The cause and diagnosis require clinical assessment.
Is neurosis still a diagnosis in DSM-5-TR or ICD-11?
Neurosis is not a current DSM-5-TR diagnosis, and ICD-11 does not preserve the old ICD-10 umbrella grouping as one current diagnostic category. Modern classifications distribute the historical territory across more specific disorders and groupings. See Is Neurosis Still a Diagnosis? DSM-5-TR, ICD-11, and Modern Psychiatry for the classification history and current status.
Conclusion: A Historical Divide Is Not a Modern Disease Pathway
The historical distinction between neurosis and psychosis was influential because it tried to capture differences in reality testing, insight, symptom organization, severity, and presumed mechanism. It never formed one stable biological staircase, and modern psychiatry no longer uses neurosis as a single diagnostic starting point. The phrase “neurosis becoming psychosis” therefore compresses several different clinical possibilities into an obsolete progression model.
A person with anxiety, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, depression, trauma-related symptoms, or another condition can later experience psychotic symptoms. That possibility is clinically real. Its meaning comes from the new symptoms and their causes, not from the idea that an old umbrella diagnosis has transformed. When hallucinations, delusions, disorganization, severe confusion, or a marked change in reality appraisal emerges, current diagnostic assessment—not the historical neurosis label—is the appropriate framework.
Related Articles
OCD Differential Diagnosis: What Conditions Can Look Like OCD? Anxiety, Autism, Psychosis, OCPD, and More
References
American Psychiatric Association. About DSM-5-TR. https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm/about-dsm
American Psychiatric Association. DSM History. https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm/about-dsm/history-of-the-dsm
Bayer, R., & Spitzer, R. L. (1985). Neurosis, psychodynamics, and DSM-III: A history of the controversy. Archives of General Psychiatry, 42(2), 187–196. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3883941/
Bürgy, M. (2008). The concept of psychosis: Historical and phenomenological aspects. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 34(6), 1200–1210. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18174608/
Frances, A., Miele, G. M., Widiger, T. A., Pincus, H. A., Manning, D., & Davis, W. W. (1993). The classification of panic disorders: From Freud to DSM-IV. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 27(Suppl 1), 3–10. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8145181/
Kaymaz, N., Drukker, M., Lieb, R., Wittchen, H.-U., Werbeloff, N., Weiser, M., Lataster, T., & van Os, J. (2012). Do subthreshold psychotic experiences predict clinical outcomes in unselected non-help-seeking population-based samples? A systematic review and meta-analysis, enriched with new results. Psychological Medicine, 42(11), 2239–2253. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22260930/
Martinho, F. P., Magalhães, D., Felício, R., Ferreira, T. F., & Jorge, S. (2023). Obsessive-compulsive symptoms in first episode psychosis and risk states: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Schizophrenia Research, 255, 41–51. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36958269/
National Institute of Mental Health. Understanding Psychosis. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/understanding-psychosis
Staines, L., Healy, C., Murphy, F., Byrne, J., Murphy, J., Kelleher, I., Cotter, D., & Cannon, M. (2023). Incidence and persistence of psychotic experiences in the general population: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 49(4), 1007–1021. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37402250/
Varghese, D., Scott, J., Welham, J., Bor, W., Najman, J., O’Callaghan, M., Williams, G., & McGrath, J. (2011). Psychotic-like experiences in major depression and anxiety disorders: A population-based survey in young adults. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 37(2), 389–393. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19687152/
World Health Organization. (2024). Clinical descriptions and diagnostic requirements for ICD-11 mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240077263