Neurosis: What It Means Today, Symptoms, History, and Modern Diagnoses
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 30, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Neurosis is a historical psychiatric and psychoanalytic umbrella term, not a single diagnosis in contemporary American psychiatric classification. The word has carried several different meanings since the eighteenth century: William Cullen used it for a broad class of “nervous diseases”; nineteenth-century medicine repeatedly reworked that category; psychoanalysis gave neurosis a theory-specific meaning centered on conflict, anxiety, defense, and symptom formation; and twentieth-century diagnostic systems used various neurotic categories before later reorganizing them.
For a modern reader, the most important rule is simple: do not translate “neurosis” into one current disorder. The DSM-5-TR does not contain neurosis as a current diagnosis, and the ICD-11 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Requirements organize the relevant clinical territory into more specific modern groupings. A historical label such as anxiety neurosis, obsessional neurosis, depressive neurosis, hysterical neurosis, or traumatic neurosis therefore has to be interpreted in its own period and theory before any comparison with a present-day diagnosis is made.
What Does Neurosis Mean Today?
Today, “neurosis” is best understood as a legacy term whose meaning depends on context. In psychiatric history it can refer to a changing family of disorders that were contrasted, at different times, with neurological disease, psychosis, personality pathology, or other diagnostic classes. In psychoanalysis it can refer to a theoretical form of symptom formation involving unconscious conflict and defenses. In older clinical records it may name a formal category that belonged to the classification system used at the time. In everyday speech, “neurosis” and “neurotic” are often used loosely for excessive worry, rigidity, repetitive habits, or emotional distress.
Those uses are related historically, but they are not interchangeable. The U.S. National Library of Medicine still has a MeSH entry for “Neurotic Disorders”, including the entry terms neuroses and psychoneuroses. MeSH is a biomedical indexing vocabulary, however, not a current diagnostic manual. Its continued presence is useful for literature retrieval and historical continuity; it does not make “neurotic disorder” a current DSM-5-TR diagnosis.
Why the Definition of Neurosis Changed So Much
The history of neurosis is unusually important because the same word has been attached to different explanatory systems. A reader who begins with a twenty-first-century dictionary definition and projects it backward will misunderstand William Cullen. A reader who begins with Freud and projects psychoanalytic meaning onto every nineteenth-century use will also misunderstand the term. And a reader who takes an ICD-10 grouping and treats it as if it were an ICD-11 grouping will collapse two different classification systems.
That is why “What is neurosis?” cannot be answered accurately with one timeless symptom list. The concept changed as medicine changed its ideas about nerves, anatomy, function, mind, etiology, diagnosis, and the purpose of psychiatric classification.
The Historical Origin of Neurosis
William Cullen and the eighteenth-century “nervous diseases”
The term is generally credited to the Scottish physician William Cullen. Historian José M. López Piñero traces its appearance to Cullen’s Synopsis Nosologiae Methodicae of 1769 and later to his First Lines of the Practice of Physick. Cullen’s neuroses were “nervous diseases” in the medical language of his era. They were not a precursor of a modern category defined simply by anxiety, intact reality testing, or unconscious conflict.
This point matters because modern summaries often rewrite the eighteenth-century term as though Cullen had invented a label for what we now call anxiety disorders. He did not. Historical scholarship, including W. F. Knoff’s history of the concept and memoir of Cullen, shows how the category arose within an older physiology and nosology of the nervous system.
Nineteenth-century medicine narrowed and reorganized the idea
During the nineteenth century, changing anatomical and physiological models altered what physicians meant by nervous disease. Some disorders increasingly became associated with identifiable lesions or specific neurological mechanisms; others remained difficult to localize anatomically and were discussed as functional disorders. The boundary around “neurosis” shifted repeatedly rather than moving in a straight line toward a single modern diagnosis.
López Piñero’s historical analysis of anatomoclinical medicine before Charcot documents this tension between anatomical localization and functional interpretations. By the late nineteenth century, figures such as Charcot, Janet, Breuer, and Freud were working in a landscape where hysteria, neurasthenia, traumatic symptoms, dissociation, anxiety phenomena, and other conditions were being separated and reinterpreted in competing ways.
Psychoanalysis gave neurosis a new theoretical meaning
Freud did not invent the word neurosis, but psychoanalysis transformed its twentieth-century meaning. Freud’s own theory also changed across his career. His early work distinguished “actual neuroses” from “psychoneuroses” and tried to explain different clinical pictures through different mechanisms. Historical scholarship on Freud’s early clinical theory shows that his formulations in the 1890s developed inside contemporary neuropathology and psychiatry rather than appearing as a finished psychoanalytic system from the outset. See Ulrike May’s historical analysis of Freud’s early clinical theory and Toon Geyskens’s account of the development of Freud’s theory of neurosis.
In later psychoanalytic traditions, neurosis commonly referred to symptom formation in a person whose contact with consensual reality was broadly preserved, with symptoms understood through concepts such as unconscious conflict, repression, defense, anxiety, compromise formation, and psychosexual development. These are theory-specific psychoanalytic constructs. They belong to the history and practice of psychoanalysis; they should not be presented as if DSM-5-TR or ICD-11 had adopted the same explanatory model.
Neurosis in the DSM: From a Central Concept to a Historical Term
DSM-I and DSM-II reflected a different psychiatric era
The first Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-I, was published by the American Psychiatric Association in 1952. The APA’s official history of the DSM explains that DSM-I was influenced by Adolf Meyer’s psychobiological “reaction” framework and by postwar psychiatric classification. DSM-II, published in 1968, removed the pervasive word “reaction” but remained much closer than later manuals to psychodynamic psychiatric language and to neurotic categories.
For anxiety in particular, historical analysis by Frances and colleagues notes that DSM-I and DSM-II used Freud’s anxiety-neurosis concept as an important organizing principle. That does not mean every diagnosis then called a neurosis was simply “anxiety disorder” in the modern sense. The category included heterogeneous phenomena, and its internal logic reflected the psychiatric theories and classification conventions of its time.
DSM-III in 1980 was the major classification break
DSM-III, published in 1980, marked the decisive American shift away from neurosis as an organizing diagnostic principle. The APA describes DSM-III as introducing explicit diagnostic criteria, multiaxial assessment, and an approach intended to be more neutral about the causes of mental disorders. Frances and colleagues describe the change in anxiety classification as one in which the term and organizing principle of neurosis were dropped.
The change was not merely a vocabulary edit. Bayer and Spitzer’s historical account of the controversy over neurosis and psychodynamics in DSM-III shows that the fate of the term became symbolic of a wider conflict about psychoanalytic explanation, descriptive diagnosis, reliability, and the identity of American psychiatry. Mitchell Wilson’s broader history likewise situates DSM-III within a major transformation of American psychiatry.
DSM-5-TR does not diagnose “neurosis”
DSM-5-TR, published in 2022, is the current text revision of DSM-5. “Neurosis” is not a current DSM-5-TR diagnosis. Present-day DSM classification uses specific diagnostic families and disorders, including anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, trauma- and stressor-related disorders, dissociative disorders, somatic symptom and related disorders, depressive disorders, and other categories that overlap only partly with the broad territory historically called neurotic.
Therefore, saying that a person “has neurosis” does not state a DSM-5-TR diagnosis. A current diagnosis requires assessment against the criteria for a specific disorder, with attention to duration, distress, impairment, exclusions, differential diagnosis, and clinical context.
Neurosis in ICD-10 and ICD-11
ICD-10 retained a broad neurotic grouping
ICD history is different from DSM history, so dates and terminology should not be transferred from one system to the other. In the World Health Organization’s ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioral disorders, the F40–F48 block was explicitly titled “Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders.” It included phobic anxiety disorders, other anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, reactions to severe stress and adjustment disorders, dissociative or conversion disorders, somatoform disorders, and other neurotic disorders.
That historical ICD-10 grouping is one reason the adjective “neurotic” survived longer in international clinical documentation than in the DSM. But an ICD-10 heading is not evidence that a single syndrome called neurosis existed underneath all of those diagnoses.
ICD-11 reorganized the clinical territory
The WHO’s current ICD-11 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Requirements, published in 2024, uses a reorganized set of mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorder groupings. Relevant phenomena now appear in distinct groupings such as anxiety or fear-related disorders, obsessive-compulsive or related disorders, disorders specifically associated with stress, dissociative disorders, and disorders of bodily distress or bodily experience.
Accordingly, it is inaccurate to carry the ICD-10 heading “neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders” forward and describe it as the current ICD-11 architecture. Historical medical records coded under ICD-10 should be interpreted according to ICD-10; current ICD-11 concepts should be interpreted according to ICD-11.
What Were the “Symptoms of Neurosis”?
There is no valid modern checklist called “symptoms of neurosis.” The historical category was too broad and changed too much for that. What can be described accurately is the range of phenomena that different writers and classification systems placed under neurotic labels.
Depending on the period and the specific category, neurotic presentations could include persistent anxiety and worry; acute fear or panic-like episodes; phobic avoidance; intrusive thoughts; compulsive rituals; bodily complaints; functional neurological symptoms; dissociative experiences; depressive symptoms; fatigue and weakness; trauma-related symptoms; sleep disturbance; irritability; indecision; and other forms of distress. The exact combination depended on the diagnosis being used, not on a universal neurosis syndrome.
Later psychiatric and psychoanalytic descriptions also often contrasted neurosis with psychosis by emphasizing broadly preserved reality testing. That distinction became historically influential, but it should not be turned into a twenty-first-century diagnostic shortcut. Modern disorders are not classified simply by placing every patient on one side or the other of a neurosis-versus-psychosis divide.
Anxiety and fear
Anxiety was central to many twentieth-century uses of neurosis, especially “anxiety neurosis” and phobic neuroses. Historical symptoms included apprehension, autonomic arousal, fear attacks, chronic tension, and avoidance. Modern anxiety diagnoses divide this territory more precisely according to the pattern of fear, triggers, persistence, functional impact, and accompanying symptoms.
Obsessions and compulsions
Obsessions, compulsions, doubt, checking, mental rituals, and intrusive thoughts were historically described in terms such as obsessional neurosis or obsessive-compulsive neurosis. The modern diagnosis of obsessive-compulsive disorder has its own criteria and evidence base. For the current clinical condition rather than the historical label, see our live guide to OCD: What Is Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder?
Somatic, conversion, and dissociative phenomena
Historical neurosis categories also covered symptoms expressed through the body, including what earlier clinicians called hysteria, conversion symptoms, somatization, and related presentations. These historical terms grouped together phenomena that modern classifications separate in different ways. Functional neurological symptoms, somatic symptom presentations, and dissociative disorders therefore should not be collapsed back into one “hysterical neurosis” diagnosis.
Low mood, fatigue, and distress
Labels such as depressive neurosis, neurasthenic neurosis, and neurasthenia appeared in older systems and traditions. They could include low mood, fatigue, weakness, irritability, sleep problems, reduced concentration, and physical complaints. Those labels do not map cleanly onto major depressive disorder, persistent depressive disorder, chronic fatigue, or any other one current condition.
Trauma-related reactions
Terms such as traumatic neurosis, war neurosis, and combat neurosis belong to the historical lineage of trauma psychiatry. Contemporary PTSD has specific diagnostic requirements. A historical diagnosis of traumatic neurosis may be relevant to understanding the development of PTSD concepts, but it is not automatically equivalent to a current PTSD diagnosis.
What Replaced Neurosis?
No single diagnosis replaced neurosis. The old umbrella was divided and reorganized across multiple modern diagnostic families. The appropriate modern translation depends on what the historical clinician actually meant and what symptoms are present now.
The following examples are conceptual bridges, not one-to-one equivalences:
• “Anxiety neurosis” contributed to the history of modern panic and generalized-anxiety concepts, but the old category is not identical to either panic disorder or generalized anxiety disorder.
• “Phobic neurosis” overlaps historically with territory now separated into specific phobia, social anxiety disorder, agoraphobia, and other anxiety presentations.
• “Obsessional neurosis” or “obsessive-compulsive neurosis” is part of the historical lineage of OCD, while psychoanalytic obsessional neurosis is a broader theory-bound construct and is not simply another name for DSM-5-TR OCD.
• “Hysterical neurosis” and “conversion neurosis” intersect historically with modern functional neurological symptom disorder and dissociative conditions, but the older category was heterogeneous and cannot be translated automatically.
• “Depressive neurosis” is an obsolete historical diagnosis and should not be treated as a direct synonym for persistent depressive disorder or major depressive disorder.
• “Traumatic neurosis” belongs to the history of trauma-related diagnosis; a modern PTSD diagnosis requires current PTSD criteria rather than the historical label alone.
• “Hypochondriacal neurosis” may overlap historically with concerns now assessed within illness anxiety disorder, somatic symptom disorder, anxiety disorders, or other medical and psychiatric differentials.
The safest method is therefore not “old name equals new name.” It is “old name plus historical context plus actual symptom description leads to a set of possible modern comparisons.”
Neurosis vs Psychosis
The neurosis–psychosis distinction was a major historical organizing contrast. In many twentieth-century formulations, neurosis referred to distressing symptoms occurring without the gross loss of reality testing associated with psychotic states. Psychosis, by contrast, came to refer to phenomena such as delusions, hallucinations, and marked impairment in reality testing, although the history of the psychosis concept is itself complex.
For modern diagnosis, the historical contrast has limited scope. Someone can have an anxiety disorder, OCD, depression, PTSD, a dissociative disorder, or a somatic symptom disorder without those conditions being called “neuroses.” Psychotic symptoms can also occur in more than one current diagnostic context. Contemporary assessment identifies the actual symptom dimensions and diagnostic criteria rather than beginning with a universal neurosis-versus-psychosis binary.
Neurosis vs Neuroticism
Neurosis and neuroticism are not the same construct. “Neurosis” is a historical clinical and theoretical term. “Neuroticism” is a modern personality trait used in dimensional personality research. Benjamin Lahey’s review describes neuroticism as a relatively stable tendency to respond with negative emotions to threat, frustration, or loss.
A person can score high or low on neuroticism without receiving a mental-disorder diagnosis. High neuroticism is associated at the population level with risk for and correlates of multiple forms of psychopathology, but a personality-trait score does not establish that someone has “a neurosis,” an anxiety disorder, depression, OCD, or any other clinical disorder.
What Caused Neurosis According to Historical Theories?
There has never been one agreed historical cause because the concept itself changed. Cullen’s eighteenth-century category belonged to a physiology of nervous disease. Nineteenth-century explanations moved among constitutional, physiological, hereditary, traumatic, and functional models. Psychoanalytic theories emphasized unconscious conflict, defense, anxiety, developmental history, and the symbolic meaning of symptoms. Other schools proposed learning, behavioral, interpersonal, existential, cultural, or biological explanations.
Modern science does not need a single cause of “neurosis” because it no longer treats neurosis as one diagnostic entity. Research instead studies the causes and mechanisms of specific disorders and transdiagnostic processes. Genetic liability, learning, temperament, stress exposure, cognitive processes, social context, neurobiology, developmental history, and other factors can matter in different combinations for different conditions. Evidence for one modern disorder should not be generalized automatically to every condition historically placed under neurosis.
How Is “Neurosis” Diagnosed Today?
In DSM-5-TR practice, it is not diagnosed as “neurosis.” A clinician instead assesses the presenting symptoms and asks which current diagnosis, if any, best accounts for them. The evaluation may consider symptom form, duration, severity, functional impairment, medical conditions, medications and substances, mood symptoms, anxiety and fear, obsessions and compulsions, trauma exposure, dissociation, psychotic symptoms, personality features, developmental factors, and relevant differential diagnoses.
The same historical word can point toward very different modern assessments. Repetitive checking might reflect OCD, generalized worry, trauma-related safety behavior, illness anxiety, or another process. Recurrent bodily symptoms might require medical evaluation and could be understood very differently depending on neurological findings, health anxiety, somatic distress, panic, medication effects, or other factors. Low mood and fatigue might reflect depressive illness, sleep problems, medical conditions, stress, or other causes.
For that reason, an online list of “neurosis symptoms” cannot be used as a diagnostic test. The clinically useful question is not “Do I have neurosis?” but “What specific symptoms are occurring, how long have they been present, how much do they impair life, and which current diagnostic framework best explains them?”
Does Neurosis Still Matter Clinically?
The word can still matter in three ways. First, it is indispensable in the history of psychiatry, neurology, psychoanalysis, and clinical psychology. Second, psychoanalytic clinicians and writers may still use neurosis as a theory-specific concept. Third, old medical records, textbooks, family stories, and translated clinical language may contain the term and require interpretation.
Its usefulness comes from reading it precisely. A psychoanalyst’s “obsessional neurosis,” an ICD-10 “neurotic, stress-related and somatoform” category, and a nineteenth-century physician’s “neurosis” are not three ways of naming the same modern disease.
Treatment: What Happens When an Old Label Meets Modern Care?
There is no single evidence-based treatment protocol for “neurosis” as one present-day diagnosis. Treatment follows the current problem that is actually identified. Anxiety disorders, OCD, trauma-related disorders, depressive disorders, functional neurological symptoms, dissociative conditions, and somatic symptom presentations have different evidence bases, assessment needs, and treatment pathways.
This is clinically important because using the old umbrella can obscure treatment selection. For example, a person whose repetitive rituals meet criteria for OCD needs an OCD-specific assessment and treatment plan, not a generic intervention for “neurosis.” A person with new neurological symptoms needs appropriate medical and neurological evaluation rather than an assumption that the symptoms are psychological because an older text would have called them “hysterical.”
Historical terminology can guide questions, but contemporary care should be based on current diagnosis, current evidence, the person’s goals, comorbidities, safety, and medical context.
How to Interpret an Old Diagnosis of Neurosis
If “neurosis” appears in an older chart, book, family document, or case history, a five-step reading method is more accurate than translating the word directly.
1. Identify the date. A label used in 1780, 1895, 1955, 1975, or 1995 may belong to very different systems.
2. Identify the classification or theoretical school. Was the author using Cullenian medicine, psychoanalysis, DSM-I, DSM-II, ICD-9, ICD-10, or another local nomenclature?
3. Read the full diagnostic phrase. “Anxiety neurosis,” “obsessional neurosis,” “depressive neurosis,” and “traumatic neurosis” carried different implications.
4. Look for the actual symptom description. Symptoms, duration, impairment, precipitating events, and the clinician’s reasoning often tell more than the umbrella word itself.
5. Translate cautiously into current categories. Treat modern diagnoses as possible comparisons that require current criteria, not as automatic replacements.
This method is especially important in research. Retrospectively assigning a modern diagnosis to historical patients can create false precision because the original records may not contain the information required by current diagnostic criteria.
Common Misconceptions About Neurosis
“Neurosis is another name for anxiety disorder.”
Anxiety formed a major part of many twentieth-century uses of neurosis, but the historical umbrella also covered obsessional, somatic, conversion, dissociative, depressive, fatigue-related, and trauma-related phenomena. Modern anxiety disorders therefore inherit only part of the old territory.
“Neurosis is still a DSM diagnosis, just under a different code.”
No. DSM-III dropped neurosis as an organizing principle in 1980, and DSM-5-TR does not list “neurosis” as a current diagnosis. Multiple current disorders occupy parts of the territory previously covered by neurotic categories.
“ICD still has neurosis, so nothing changed.”
ICD-10 did retain an F40–F48 grouping called “Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders.” ICD-11 reorganized that territory into different modern groupings. The version of ICD matters.
“Neuroticism means a person has neurosis.”
No. Neuroticism is a dimensional personality trait. It can be studied in people with or without mental disorders and does not function as a diagnostic synonym for neurosis.
“Neurosis means mild mental illness.”
That shorthand appeared in some twentieth-century descriptions, often in contrast with psychosis, but it is unreliable as a general definition. Conditions historically placed under neurotic categories can cause severe impairment, and modern diagnostic severity is not determined by whether an old label once belonged to the “neurotic” side of a classification.
“If someone has insight, the problem must be neurotic rather than psychotic.”
Insight varies within and across modern disorders. OCD itself can occur with different levels of insight. Modern assessment therefore does not reduce diagnosis to a single insight test or to the older neurosis–psychosis dichotomy.
Practical Interpretation for a Modern Reader
If you encounter the word “neurosis” in contemporary conversation, first ask what the speaker is using it to mean. If they mean chronic worry, that is colloquial language and should not be converted automatically into a diagnosis. If the term appears in psychoanalytic writing, read it within that theoretical system. If it appears in an older medical record, identify the manual and year. If the question concerns current symptoms, set the historical label aside and evaluate the symptoms using current clinical categories.
This approach preserves the historical meaning of neurosis without forcing old concepts into modern boxes. It also prevents the reverse error: reading modern categories back into the past as though clinicians in different eras were diagnosing the same entities under older names.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is neurosis a mental illness?
Historically, neurosis was used for categories that clinicians regarded as illnesses or disorders, but its scope varied dramatically. In current DSM-5-TR practice, “neurosis” is not itself a diagnosis. A modern clinician would identify the specific disorder or symptom pattern, if any, rather than diagnose neurosis.
Is neurosis in DSM-5-TR?
No. DSM-5-TR does not list neurosis as a current diagnosis. The decisive reorganization began with DSM-III in 1980, when neurosis was dropped as an organizing diagnostic principle and the relevant clinical territory was divided into more specific categories.
Is neurosis in ICD-11?
ICD-11 does not organize mental disorders under the broad ICD-10 heading “Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders.” ICD-11 uses separate contemporary groupings, including anxiety or fear-related disorders, obsessive-compulsive or related disorders, disorders specifically associated with stress, dissociative disorders, and disorders of bodily distress or bodily experience.
What is neurosis called today?
There is no single modern replacement. What used to be called neurosis can correspond, depending on the historical context and actual symptoms, to modern anxiety disorders, OCD or related disorders, trauma- and stressor-related disorders, dissociative disorders, somatic symptom presentations, depressive disorders, functional neurological symptom disorder, or other conditions. Sometimes an old use has no clean modern equivalent.
What are the symptoms of neurosis?
There is no current diagnostic symptom list for neurosis. Historically, neurotic categories included anxiety, fear, phobic avoidance, intrusive thoughts, compulsions, somatic complaints, conversion symptoms, dissociation, low mood, fatigue, trauma reactions, and other forms of distress. Which symptoms belonged to “neurosis” depended on the period and the particular diagnosis.
What is the difference between neurosis and psychosis?
Historically, many twentieth-century theories contrasted neurosis, in which reality testing was broadly preserved, with psychosis, in which reality testing could be markedly impaired. Contemporary psychiatric diagnosis is more specific and does not classify every disorder by this single binary. Psychotic symptoms are assessed directly when clinically relevant.
What is the difference between neurosis and neuroticism?
Neurosis is a historical clinical and psychoanalytic term. Neuroticism is a dimensional personality trait describing a tendency toward negative emotional reactivity. A neuroticism score is not a diagnosis and does not establish the presence of a mental disorder.
Is OCD a neurosis?
OCD was historically described within neurotic frameworks, including the terms obsessional neurosis and obsessive-compulsive neurosis. In DSM-5-TR and ICD-11, OCD is a modern diagnosis within obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, not a subtype of a current diagnosis called neurosis. The historical relationship is real; the categories are not identical.
Can neurosis be cured?
Because neurosis is not one current diagnosis, there is no single prognosis or cure rate. Many conditions once grouped under neurotic labels can improve substantially with evidence-based treatment, but prognosis and treatment depend on the specific modern condition, severity, duration, comorbidity, medical factors, and individual circumstances.
Can a doctor diagnose neurosis today?
A clinician may use the word historically, descriptively, or within a psychoanalytic formulation, but a formal contemporary diagnosis in DSM-5-TR or ICD-11 would use the relevant current diagnostic category rather than “neurosis” as one umbrella diagnosis.
Does neurosis mean someone is “losing touch with reality”?
In many later historical formulations, the opposite distinction was emphasized: neurosis was contrasted with psychosis partly because reality testing was considered relatively preserved. But the old contrast should not be used as a self-diagnostic rule. New hallucinations, delusions, severe confusion, or major changes in reality testing require direct clinical assessment rather than interpretation through the historical word neurosis.
Related Articles
OCD Symptoms: What Are the Signs of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder? Obsessions, Compulsions, and Examples
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://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1985.01790250081011
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
Geyskens, T. (2001). Freud’s letters to Fliess: From seduction to sexual biology, from psychopathology to a clinical anthropology. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 82(Pt 5), 861–876. https://doi.org/10.1516/0020757011601244
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
Lahey, B. B. (2009). Public health significance of neuroticism. American Psychologist, 64(4), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015309
López Piñero, J. M. (1983). The concept of neurosis. In Historical Origins of the Concept of Neurosis. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511753510.003
May, U. (1999). Freud’s early clinical theory (1894–1896): Outline and context. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 80(Pt 4), 769–781. https://doi.org/10.1516/0020757991599034
National Library of Medicine. Neurotic Disorders. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68009497
Wilson, M. (1993). DSM-III and the transformation of American psychiatry: A history. American Journal of Psychiatry, 150(3), 399–410. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.150.3.399
World Health Organization. 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. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240077263