Is Neurosis Still a Diagnosis? DSM-5-TR, ICD-11, and Modern Psychiatry
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 30, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Short answer: no. DSM-5-TR does not contain a diagnosis named neurosis and does not use neurosis as a current diagnostic umbrella. ICD-11 likewise no longer has one unified “neurosis” grouping. The word survives in the history of psychiatry, psychoanalytic theory, older medical literature, controlled indexing vocabularies, and ordinary language. A person described decades ago as having a neurosis would now be assessed for a specific present-day disorder, symptom pattern, personality trait, or non-disorder problem—if any diagnosis is warranted.
That answer sounds simple, but the history is easy to flatten into a misleading slogan. Psychiatry did not discover that all “neuroses” were really one modern disorder under a better name. The old umbrella covered several different clinical pictures, and different diagnostic systems dismantled it in different ways. Some historical categories contributed to the ancestry of anxiety disorders; others are connected to obsessive-compulsive disorder, trauma-related disorders, dissociative or functional neurological presentations, somatic symptom-related diagnoses, and depressive conditions. Those relationships are historical lineages, not automatic one-to-one translations.
The safest modern interpretation is therefore classification-specific: ask which manual, which edition, which country or health system, and which historical or theoretical use of the word is being discussed. “Neurosis” in an eighteenth-century nosology, a Freudian case history, DSM-II, ICD-10, a contemporary psychoanalytic paper, and casual conversation are not the same construct.
Is neurosis a diagnosis in DSM-5-TR?
No. The American Psychiatric Association identifies DSM-5-TR as the current edition of the DSM, published in 2022. DSM-5-TR organizes recognized mental disorders into specific diagnostic groupings and criteria sets; “neurosis” is not a diagnosis or diagnostic class in that current system. APA’s history of the DSM places the major structural break in DSM-III, published in 1980, which introduced explicit diagnostic criteria, a multiaxial system, and an approach intended to be more neutral about the causes of mental disorders.
The disappearance of neurosis was not merely a vocabulary edit. Historical scholarship on the DSM-III controversy shows that the status of neurosis was bound up with a wider dispute over psychodynamic explanation and descriptive diagnosis. Bayer and Spitzer’s account of the DSM-III neurosis controversy documents how contested that shift was. A historical review of anxiety classification likewise notes that DSM-I and DSM-II used anxiety neurosis as an important organizing idea, while DSM-III dropped the term and the broader organizing principle of neurosis. Frances and colleagues trace that transition in the classification of panic and anxiety disorders.
DSM-5-TR is a text revision of DSM-5 rather than a return to older etiological categories. First and colleagues describe DSM-5-TR as an update of diagnostic text, criteria, terminology, and selected categories. Their discussion also illustrates an important nuance: DSM editions have sometimes retained outdated expressions in parentheses or explanatory text to help readers connect old and new terminology. The presence of a historical term in an index, parenthetical synonym, quotation, or historical discussion does not turn that term back into a current diagnosis.
APA also posts approved updates to DSM-5-TR criteria and text. These supplements update the current manual; they do not restore neurosis as a diagnostic umbrella. When this article says “not a DSM-5-TR diagnosis,” it refers specifically to the current APA classification, not to every historical edition of the DSM.
Is neurosis a diagnosis in ICD-11?
Not as a single modern diagnosis or umbrella grouping. WHO’s ICD-11 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Requirements (CDDR), published in 2024, are the current clinical diagnostic manual for the ICD-11 chapter on mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders. WHO explains that ICD-11 came into effect for health reporting in January 2022 and that the CDDR support clinical identification and diagnosis.
The comparison with ICD-10 is especially important because many web pages blur the two systems. ICD-10 did contain the block F40–F48 titled “Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders.” Yet even ICD-10 explicitly stated that the concept of neurosis had not been retained as a major organizing principle. The block was grouped partly because of the historical association of its disorders with neurosis, and ICD-10 still included residual labels such as “other neurotic disorders.”
That wording is visible in the WHO’s official ICD-10 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines: F40–F48 is named “Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders,” while the introduction says the concept of neurosis was not retained as a major organizing principle. So even for ICD-10, it is inaccurate to say that “neurosis” functioned simply as one diagnosis equivalent to the whole F40–F48 block.
ICD-11 reorganized that territory further. WHO’s ICD-11 CDDR describes how the old ICD-10 grouping was split across multiple modern groupings, including anxiety or fear-related disorders, obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, disorders specifically associated with stress, dissociative disorders, and bodily distress disorder. The current WHO manual therefore provides a particularly clear answer to “what happened to neurosis in ICD-11?”: the historically bundled territory was redistributed rather than renamed as a single successor diagnosis.
Why DSM and ICD require separate answers
DSM and ICD are related classification systems, but they are not interchangeable editions of the same book. The DSM is published by the American Psychiatric Association and is especially influential in the United States. The ICD is produced by the World Health Organization and is the global classification standard for health reporting. A term can have a different history, placement, code, or residual role in one system than in the other.
This is why statements such as “neurosis was removed in 1980” need a qualifier. That date refers to the publication of DSM-III and the major change in American psychiatric classification. It does not mean that every international classification stopped using every neurotic label in 1980. ICD-10, published later, still used “neurotic” in the title of F40–F48 and in some residual categories, even while declaring that neurosis was no longer a major organizing principle. ICD-11 then reorganized those conditions into more specific groupings.
What did neurosis mean before modern classification?
The meaning of neurosis changed repeatedly over more than two centuries. William Cullen introduced the term in eighteenth-century medicine, but Cullen’s category does not correspond to a modern anxiety disorder or to Freud’s later concept. A historical review by Knoff follows the term from Cullen through later psychiatric uses, and later historical scholarship shows how its conceptual territory shifted as neurology, psychiatry, and psychological theories changed.
Nineteenth-century development was complex rather than linear. Køppe’s historical analysis emphasizes the changing relation between neurosis, neurology, psychiatry, psychic shock, and related concepts. By the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, “neurosis” could refer to very different proposed disorders and mechanisms depending on the author.
Psychoanalysis then gave neurosis another influential meaning. In Freud’s framework, neurotic symptoms were interpreted through conflict, defense, repression, anxiety, and psychosexual development. Specific constructions such as anxiety neurosis and obsessional neurosis were embedded in that theoretical system. A psychoanalytic concept is therefore not identical to a DSM diagnosis, even when later disorders inherit some of the same observable phenomena or historical vocabulary.
For example, the history of obsessional neurosis shows that Freud’s category was a specific nosographic innovation within a late nineteenth-century intellectual context. Modern obsessive-compulsive disorder has a historical relationship to that literature, but OCD is defined today by current diagnostic criteria rather than by Freud’s theory of obsessional neurosis.
What changed with DSM-III in 1980?
DSM-III is the pivotal edition for the modern American answer because it changed both the architecture of diagnosis and the role of theoretical explanation. Earlier DSM editions carried much more visible psychodynamic language and included diagnoses explicitly named as psychoneurotic or neurotic. DSM-III aimed for operationalized criteria that could be used more consistently across clinicians and research settings, and it reorganized many conditions into more specific categories.
The APA’s official DSM history identifies explicit criteria and relative etiological neutrality as key DSM-III innovations. Bayer and Spitzer show that the debate over neurosis was one of the emblematic controversies surrounding this change. The result was not the scientific discovery of a single replacement for neurosis. It was a reconfiguration of psychiatric classification.
That distinction matters because a historical umbrella can disappear in at least three ways: its name can be dropped; the phenomena inside it can be divided into multiple categories; and the explanatory theory that once tied the phenomena together can lose its privileged role in the classification. All three happened to varying degrees in the transition away from neurosis.
So what replaced neurosis?
There is no one-to-one replacement. Modern psychiatry replaced the umbrella function of neurosis with a network of more specific diagnostic categories and groupings. Which current concept is relevant depends on what the historical writer meant and what symptoms a present-day person actually has.
If an older text uses neurosis to mean chronic anxiety, phobic fear, panic-like episodes, obsessions and compulsions, conversion symptoms, dissociation, bodily distress, depressive symptoms, or post-traumatic problems, each of those domains now has its own differential diagnosis. Some are in separate DSM-5-TR chapters; in ICD-11, several are in distinct groupings that were previously bundled within the ICD-10 F40–F48 territory.
This is also why “neurosis = anxiety disorder” is too narrow. Anxiety disorders inherited an important part of the historical territory, but not all of it. OCD, for example, is separated from anxiety disorders in modern DSM organization and is also placed in an obsessive-compulsive and related grouping in ICD-11. Trauma-related, dissociative, somatic, and functional neurological presentations require their own modern frameworks.
Historical neurosis labels and their modern clinical destinations
Anxiety neurosis
“Anxiety neurosis” once covered a broader and differently organized territory than a single current anxiety diagnosis. Crocq’s history of generalized anxiety disorder shows that the older category included both panic-like episodes and a more persistent apprehensive state. In DSM-III, that territory was split, importantly, into generalized anxiety disorder and panic disorder. Crocq’s review is a useful demonstration of why an old label should not be translated mechanically into one modern diagnosis.
Obsessional neurosis
“Obsessional neurosis” belongs to the historical development of what is now understood through OCD and related concepts, but the terms are not interchangeable across time. Freud’s construct carried a psychoanalytic theory of mechanism that is not part of modern diagnostic criteria. For current clinical intent, the appropriate destination is the English Hub’s OCD guide, which covers modern symptoms, diagnosis, causes, and treatment.
Hysterical or conversion neurosis
Historical hysteria and conversion neurosis contributed to the ancestry of modern functional neurological and dissociative concepts, but the classification and proposed mechanisms changed substantially. Levenson and Sharpe describe the evolution from etiological ideas rooted in hysterical conversion toward more phenomenological classification that emphasizes positive clinical evidence and compatibility with recognized neurological disease. A historical diagnosis of “hysterical neurosis” therefore should not simply be rewritten as a current functional neurological disorder without a modern assessment.
Traumatic neurosis
“Traumatic neurosis” has an important place in the history of trauma-related psychopathology, but historical forms were heterogeneous. Holdorff’s history of Oppenheim’s traumatic neurosis explicitly warns against equating Oppenheim’s concept with present-day PTSD. Modern trauma diagnoses have their own requirements, and not every historical post-traumatic presentation maps onto PTSD.
Depressive neurosis
“Depressive neurosis” appeared in older psychiatric nomenclature and persisted for a time as transitional terminology around depressive categories. The history summarized by First and colleagues illustrates how DSM conventions sometimes preserved older expressions as alternative names while classifications were changing. A historical “depressive neurosis” label should not be treated as an automatic synonym for major depressive disorder or persistent depressive disorder; the original criteria, duration, severity, and context matter.
Why there is no exact crosswalk from neurosis to a modern diagnosis
A diagnostic crosswalk works well only when two systems define sufficiently similar categories. “Neurosis” fails that test because its meaning varied across eras and schools. The same word could designate a broad class, a particular psychodynamic organization, a residual diagnosis, or a family of symptom patterns. Even within one era, authors disagreed about boundaries and causation.
Modern systems also divide clinical reality along different lines. Symptoms such as worry, avoidance, intrusive thoughts, compulsive rituals, depersonalization, functional neurological symptoms, bodily preoccupation, depressed mood, and trauma-related intrusions can occur in multiple conditions or below diagnostic thresholds. Classification depends on the full syndrome, duration, impairment, exclusions, developmental context, comorbidity, and differential diagnosis—not on whether an older writer might once have called the presentation neurotic.
The correct modern translation is therefore often a differential diagnosis rather than a synonym. Sometimes the outcome is one current diagnosis, sometimes multiple co-occurring diagnoses, sometimes a symptom-level formulation, and sometimes no mental disorder diagnosis at all.
Does “neurosis” still appear in medical databases?
Yes, and this can confuse readers. The U.S. National Library of Medicine still has a Medical Subject Headings descriptor called “Neurotic Disorders”, with entry terms including “Neuroses” and “Psychoneuroses.” MeSH is a controlled vocabulary used to organize and retrieve biomedical literature. Its existence is not evidence that DSM-5-TR or ICD-11 recognizes “neurosis” as a current diagnosis.
Indexing systems need to connect literature across decades. A researcher searching older papers may need a legacy descriptor even after clinical classification has changed. The same principle applies to historical labels preserved in archives, textbook discussions, database synonyms, and some coding cross-references. Search vocabulary and diagnostic vocabulary serve different purposes.
Neurosis, neuroticism, and “neurotic” are three different things
Neuroticism is a modern personality trait construct, not a diagnosis of neurosis. The National Library of Medicine defines neuroticism as a personality trait involving a tendency to respond to threat, frustration, or loss with negative emotions. In contemporary personality psychology it is commonly studied as one of the Big Five traits.
A person can score high on neuroticism without having a mental disorder. A person can meet criteria for an anxiety disorder, OCD, depression, PTSD, or another condition without being meaningfully described by the historical diagnosis “neurosis.” Trait measurement, symptom assessment, screening, and clinical diagnosis answer different questions.
The everyday adjective “neurotic” adds a third usage. In ordinary speech it may mean anxious, perfectionistic, easily worried, emotionally reactive, or preoccupied. That label is imprecise and can become stigmatizing when it is used as a judgment about a person. It does not establish a diagnosis or a Big Five score.
Does the absence of neurosis mean the underlying problems disappeared?
No. Diagnostic categories change while human experiences can persist. People still experience disabling anxiety, panic, phobias, intrusive thoughts, compulsions, dissociation, functional neurological symptoms, bodily distress, depression, and trauma-related symptoms. Modern psychiatry names and organizes these patterns differently.
This is one reason historical reading requires two levels at once. At the first level, a historical diagnosis should be understood on its own terms: what the author meant, what manual was in use, and what theory of illness organized the category. At the second level, a modern reader can ask which current phenomena overlap with that description. The second question should not erase the first.
Was neurosis abandoned because it was scientifically disproved?
That formulation is too simple. The decline of neurosis reflects changes in diagnostic reliability, classification philosophy, theory, research priorities, and the desire for more explicit criteria. DSM-III’s designers moved toward operational description and relative neutrality about etiology. The broad psychodynamic umbrella no longer fit that architecture.
The historical record also shows continuing debate. Bayer and Spitzer describe the professional controversy surrounding DSM-III, while later scholarship on specific conditions shows that some old observations remained clinically recognizable even when their theoretical explanation and category names changed. Diagnostic history is therefore a history of reorganization as well as rejection.
What does a clinician diagnose today instead of neurosis?
A clinician does not begin by choosing the modern synonym for neurosis. The assessment begins with the person’s actual experiences: onset, duration, triggers, thoughts, emotions, behaviors, bodily symptoms, avoidance, functional impact, medical and substance factors, developmental history, risk, and co-occurring problems. The clinician then considers current diagnostic criteria and differential diagnoses.
For one person, the relevant current diagnosis may be an anxiety or fear-related disorder. For another, it may be OCD, a depressive disorder, a trauma- and stressor-related disorder, a dissociative disorder, a functional neurological presentation, or a somatic or bodily distress diagnosis. More than one disorder can be present. A third person may have distressing symptoms that do not meet criteria for any disorder.
This is why self-diagnosing “neurosis” from a symptom list is not clinically useful. APA emphasizes that DSM criteria are intended for evaluation by trained professionals, and WHO’s ICD-11 CDDR is likewise designed to support qualified clinical diagnosis. A screening questionnaire, an online description, a personality score, or a historical label can inform a conversation, but none by itself determines a current diagnosis.
Does neurosis still have a place in psychoanalysis?
Yes, in some psychoanalytic traditions the term remains conceptually meaningful. Psychoanalytic writers may use neurosis to describe a type of conflict, defense, symptom formation, or personality organization rather than a DSM-5-TR or ICD-11 diagnosis. That usage belongs to a theoretical language with its own history and assumptions.
The important editorial rule is to name the framework. “Neurosis in Freud” means something different from “neurosis in DSM-II,” “neurotic disorders in ICD-10,” or “neuroticism in Big Five research.” A psychoanalytic formulation can coexist with a current clinical diagnosis, but the two levels should not be silently collapsed into one another.
What should you do if an old medical record says “neurosis”?
Read the label in context before trying to translate it. The year matters. The country and diagnostic system matter. The exact phrase matters: “anxiety neurosis,” “depressive neurosis,” “obsessional neurosis,” “traumatic neurosis,” and “neurotic disorder, unspecified” came from different classificatory or theoretical contexts.
If the record matters for current care, the practical question is not “what is the new name for my old neurosis?” but “what current symptoms, impairment, diagnoses, or treatment needs are present now?” A contemporary clinician may use the old record as historical information while performing a current assessment.
Old labels also should not be retroactively treated as proof that a person met today’s criteria. Diagnostic thresholds, exclusions, symptom definitions, and conceptual boundaries have changed. Historical documentation can be clinically valuable without being a time-traveling DSM-5-TR or ICD-11 diagnosis.
Treatment implications: there is no single treatment for “neurosis”
Because neurosis is not one current diagnosis, there is no single evidence-based treatment package for “neurosis” as a modern clinical entity. Treatment is selected for the present problem and diagnosis: for example, evidence-based care for OCD is different in important ways from care for panic disorder, PTSD, depression, or functional neurological symptoms. Comorbidity, severity, medical context, age, patient preferences, previous treatment response, and access also matter.
For modern OCD specifically, see the Hub’s OCD overview rather than using historical obsessional-neurosis treatment language. For cases where repetitive thoughts or behaviors could have several explanations, the OCD differential diagnosis guide explains how clinicians distinguish OCD from anxiety, psychosis, personality traits, autism-related repetitive behavior, trauma-related phenomena, and other look-alikes.
Common misconceptions
“Neurosis is just the old name for anxiety disorder.”
Anxiety disorders inherited part of the historical territory, but neurosis was broader and changed meaning across time. OCD, trauma-related disorders, dissociative and functional neurological presentations, bodily distress or somatic concepts, and depressive conditions also intersect with parts of its history.
“ICD-10 still used the word, so neurosis is still a diagnosis.”
ICD-10 used “neurotic” in the F40–F48 block title and in residual categories, but WHO explicitly stated that neurosis was not retained as a major organizing principle. The official ICD-10 manual is clear on this point. ICD-11 subsequently redistributed the territory into multiple groupings.
“If a database has a neurosis code or subject heading, DSM-5-TR must recognize it.”
No. Bibliographic indexing, administrative coding, historical terminology, and current clinical diagnosis are different systems. MeSH deliberately preserves legacy vocabulary so older literature remains searchable.
“Neuroticism means mild neurosis.”
No. Neuroticism is a personality trait. It can correlate with vulnerability to emotional distress, but a trait score is not a diagnosis and is not a severity scale for an obsolete disorder called neurosis.
“Psychosis is simply severe neurosis.”
Modern classification does not treat psychosis as the severe end of one neurosis-to-psychosis continuum. Psychotic symptoms and psychotic disorders have their own definitions and differential diagnoses. Historical contrasts between “neurotic” and “psychotic” functioning belong to older classificatory and theoretical traditions and should not be used as a current diagnostic shortcut.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is neurosis in DSM-5-TR?
No. DSM-5-TR is the current DSM edition, and neurosis is not a current DSM-5-TR diagnosis or diagnostic umbrella. APA’s DSM overview and DSM history provide the current classification context and the DSM-III transition.
Is neurosis in ICD-11?
Not as one current diagnosis or unified umbrella grouping. WHO’s ICD-11 CDDR reorganizes the territory previously clustered in ICD-10 F40–F48 across several modern diagnostic groupings.
When was neurosis removed from the DSM?
The pivotal change occurred with DSM-III in 1980, when the organizing principle of neurosis was dropped and diagnosis shifted toward more explicit operational criteria and categories. Later DSM editions continued that post-neurosis structure, although historical terms can still appear in explanatory or legacy contexts.
Why was neurosis removed?
The change reflected a broader reorganization of psychiatric classification: greater emphasis on explicit diagnostic criteria, improved reliability, more descriptive categories, and less dependence on one psychodynamic theory of causation. The change was controversial and should be understood as a historical shift in nosology, not as a single experiment that “disproved” every concept associated with neurosis.
What diagnosis replaced neurosis?
No single diagnosis replaced it. Historical neurosis categories were redistributed across multiple modern diagnoses and diagnostic groupings. The correct modern category depends on the actual symptom pattern and the specific historical label being translated.
Is anxiety neurosis the same as generalized anxiety disorder?
No. Historical anxiety neurosis included phenomena that were later separated. Crocq’s diagnostic history describes the DSM-III split of anxiety neurosis into generalized anxiety disorder and panic disorder, illustrating why the old and new terms are not synonyms.
Is obsessional neurosis the same as OCD?
They are historically related, but they are not interchangeable concepts. Obsessional neurosis was formulated within psychoanalytic and earlier psychiatric traditions; modern OCD is defined by current diagnostic criteria and evidence. For current clinical information, use the OCD canonical article.
Can a doctor still write “neurosis” in a note?
A clinician may use the word historically, descriptively, or within a particular theoretical tradition, and legacy terminology can appear in records or databases. That does not make “neurosis” a current DSM-5-TR diagnosis or a single ICD-11 diagnostic category. The formal diagnosis should be interpreted according to the classification system actually being used.
Is neurosis a mental illness?
The question needs a historical qualifier. Neurosis was historically used for conditions considered psychiatric or nervous disorders, but it is not one current diagnostic entity. Some people historically labeled neurotic would meet criteria for a current mental disorder; others might not. The old word alone cannot determine present diagnostic status.
Is being neurotic the same as having a mental disorder?
No. “Neurotic” is often an informal adjective, while neuroticism is a measurable personality trait. Neither automatically establishes a mental disorder. Diagnosis depends on a defined clinical syndrome, not an everyday label or a personality score.
The modern answer in one sentence
Neurosis is best treated today as a historically important umbrella and theoretical term whose former clinical territory has been redistributed across multiple modern diagnoses and constructs; it is not a current DSM-5-TR diagnosis and is not a single ICD-11 diagnostic grouping.
Related Articles
OCD Differential Diagnosis: What Conditions Can Look Like OCD? Anxiety, Autism, Psychosis, OCPD, and More
References
American Psychiatric Association. DSM History. https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm/about-dsm/history-of-the-dsm
American Psychiatric Association. What Is the DSM? DSM-5-TR. https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/what-is-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://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1985.01790250081011
Crocq, M.-A. (2017). The history of generalized anxiety disorder as a diagnostic category. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 19(2), 107–116. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2017.19.2/macrocq
First, M. B., Clarke, D. E., Yousif, L., Eng, A. M., Gogtay, N., & Appelbaum, P. S. (2023). DSM-5-TR: Rationale, process, and overview of changes. Psychiatric Services, 74(8), 869–875. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.20220334
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://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(93)90013-r
Holdorff, B. (2011). The fight for ‘traumatic neurosis’, 1889–1916: Hermann Oppenheim and his opponents in Berlin. History of Psychiatry, 22(4), 465–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957154X10390495
Knoff, W. F. (1970). A history of the concept of neurosis, with a memoir of William Cullen. American Journal of Psychiatry, 127(1), 80–84. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.127.1.80
Køppe, S. (2009). Neurosis: Aspects of its conceptual development in the nineteenth century. History of Psychiatry, 20(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957154X08092426
Levenson, J. L., & Sharpe, M. (2016). The classification of conversion disorder (functional neurologic symptom disorder) in ICD and DSM. Handbook of Clinical Neurology, 139, 189–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-801772-2.00016-3
May-Tolzmann, U. (1998). Obsessional neurosis: A nosographic innovation by Freud. History of Psychiatry, 9(35), 335–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957154X9800903504
National Library of Medicine. Neurotic Disorders — Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68009497
National Library of Medicine. Neuroticism — Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/2023435
World Health Organization. (1992). The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders: Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines. https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/classification/other-classifications/9241544228_eng.pdf
World Health Organization. (2024). Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Requirements for ICD-11 Mental, Behavioural and Neurodevelopmental Disorders (CDDR). https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240077263