What Happened to Neurosis in ICD-11? Modern Classification Explained
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 30, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Short answer: ICD-11 did not rename neurosis or replace it with one new diagnosis. It removed neurosis as an organizing umbrella for current mental disorders and redistributed the old territory across more specific diagnostic groupings. Anxiety and fear-related disorders, obsessive-compulsive or related disorders, disorders specifically associated with stress, dissociative disorders, and disorders of bodily distress or bodily experience now occupy areas that older classifications had partly gathered under neurotic language.
The change is explicit in the World Health Organization’s ICD-11 Reference Guide. In the rationale for Chapter 06, WHO states that ICD-11 was designed to reflect current scientific evidence about relationships among disorders rather than older concepts such as neurosis, which the guide describes as having poor construct and predictive validity. The same rationale emphasizes clinical utility and a chapter architecture that can represent a larger number of evidence-informed disorder groupings.
This is a classification story, not a claim that experiences once called neurotic vanished. The experiences remained: persistent anxiety, phobic fear, obsessions and compulsions, trauma-related symptoms, dissociation, bodily distress, depersonalization, health anxiety, and other phenomena still require clinical description and, when criteria are met, diagnosis. What changed was the taxonomic container. For the broad meaning and history of the term, see Neurosis: What It Means Today, Symptoms, History, and Modern Diagnoses.
The key distinction: an old umbrella term is not a modern diagnosis
A modern reader can easily collapse several different things into the single word “neurosis.” Historically, neurosis could function as a broad psychiatric family, a psychoanalytic concept, a label for particular symptom patterns, or a contrast term opposed to psychosis. In a specific older manual it could also name a formal diagnostic category or appear inside a block heading. These uses belong to different periods and theories.
ICD-11, by contrast, is a current international disease classification. Its mental, behavioral, or neurodevelopmental disorders are organized into defined diagnostic groupings and categories. The WHO Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Requirements for ICD-11 were published in 2024 as the clinical manual for identifying these disorders. WHO notes that ICD-11 was adopted by the World Health Assembly in May 2019 and came into effect as a basis for international health reporting in January 2022.
So the question “What happened to neurosis in ICD-11?” has a precise answer: the old umbrella did not survive as a current diagnostic grouping. Its former contents were reorganized. That reorganization must be understood category by category rather than by looking for a single successor code.
ICD-10 had already weakened the neurosis concept
The disappearance of the neurosis umbrella in ICD-11 was the endpoint of a longer transition. The 1992 WHO ICD-10 clinical manual already stated that the traditional division between neurosis and psychosis was not used as the main organizing principle of ICD-10. At the same time, ICD-10 retained the adjective “neurotic” in the block F40–F48, titled “Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders.”
That makes ICD-10 an intermediate system. It no longer treated neurosis as the foundational theory of nonpsychotic mental disorder, yet it preserved historical vocabulary and grouped several families together under a heading inherited from that history. The dedicated cluster article Neurosis in ICD-9 and ICD-10: How the Category Survived Outside DSM reconstructs that transition in detail.
This nuance matters because saying “ICD-10 diagnosed neurosis” is too broad, while saying “neurosis disappeared before ICD-10” is also inaccurate. ICD-10 contained specific diagnoses, not one unitary disease called neurosis, but its F40–F48 architecture still carried the term “neurotic” and some legacy labels. ICD-11 completed the structural break by replacing that mixed block with multiple contemporary groupings.
What changed in ICD-11’s mental-disorders architecture?
ICD-11 reorganized Chapter 06 around more numerous and more differentiated disorder groupings. In a major overview of the revision, Reed and colleagues explain that the ordering and grouping of disorders were informed by evidence concerning shared etiology, pathophysiology, and phenomenology, while also prioritizing clinical utility and global applicability. The revision was not merely a renaming exercise.
A comparative review by Gaebel, Stricker, and Kerst notes that the ICD-11 mental, behavioral, or neurodevelopmental disorders chapter contains 21 disorder groupings compared with 11 in ICD-10. The greater structural flexibility allowed categories that had been crowded together in ICD-10 to be separated into more coherent families.
WHO’s current ICD-11 fact sheet describes the revision as scientifically updated, fully electronic, and designed to improve clinical and coding precision. That broader redesign helps explain why historical labels were not simply carried forward when they no longer provided a useful organizing framework.
There is no ICD-11 code that functions as the new universal “neurosis”
A common expectation is that a deleted umbrella must have been replaced by another umbrella. ICD-11 does not work that way here. It does not say that neurosis now equals anxiety disorder, bodily distress disorder, OCD, adjustment disorder, or any other single diagnosis. Different portions of the historical territory moved in different directions.
That is why one-to-one statements such as “neurosis became anxiety disorder” are historically and clinically misleading. Anxiety formed one large branch of the old territory, but neurosis also encompassed obsessive-compulsive, dissociative, somatic, trauma-related, depressive, depersonalization, and other presentations in different periods and systems.
Where did the old ICD-10 F40–F48 territory go?
The clearest way to understand ICD-11 is to follow the old F40–F48 territory into its new destinations. The mapping below is a historical crosswalk, not a rule for diagnosing a person from an old label.
F40–F41 anxiety disorders → Anxiety or fear-related disorders
ICD-10 placed phobic anxiety disorders at F40 and other anxiety disorders at F41 inside the larger F40–F48 neurotic/stress-related/somatoform block. ICD-11 gives anxiety and fear-related disorders their own grouping. This is one of the most visible ways in which the old neurotic architecture was dismantled.
The ICD-11 anxiety grouping is not simply the old F40 and F41 copied into a new box. Kogan and colleagues’ classification paper describes a lifespan grouping in which disorders are partly differentiated by the focus of apprehension—the object, situation, or anticipated outcome around which fear or anxiety is organized. The revision also clarified the relationship between panic disorder and agoraphobia and provided a panic-attack qualifier that can occur in other disorders.
Field testing subsequently found that clinicians applying the ICD-11 anxiety and fear-related guidelines achieved diagnostic accuracy and clinical-utility ratings that were equivalent or superior to ICD-10 for several tested conditions. The international case-controlled study included 1,840 mental health professionals and informed further refinement of the guidelines.
F42 obsessive-compulsive disorder → Obsessive-compulsive or related disorders
In ICD-10, OCD was F42 inside the F40–F48 block. ICD-11 places OCD in a distinct obsessive-compulsive or related disorders grouping. This is a major taxonomic statement: obsessive-compulsive phenomena are no longer nested inside a block whose heading carries the historical word “neurotic.”
Stein and colleagues set out the evidence and rationale for the ICD-11 obsessive-compulsive or related disorders grouping. The grouping brings together OCD with related conditions on the basis of shared clinical features and evidence rather than because they belong to a general neurosis category.
This does not mean the psychoanalytic term “obsessional neurosis” and the modern diagnosis of OCD are interchangeable. The historical construct carried theoretical assumptions about conflict, defense, symptom formation, and personality that are not diagnostic criteria for current OCD. Modern OCD should be understood through its current classification and evidence base.
F43 reactions to severe stress and adjustment disorders → Disorders specifically associated with stress
ICD-10 placed reactions to severe stress and adjustment disorders at F43 inside the mixed F40–F48 block. ICD-11 establishes a dedicated grouping for disorders specifically associated with stress. The grouping includes revised concepts of post-traumatic stress disorder and adjustment disorder and introduces diagnoses such as complex PTSD and prolonged grief disorder.
Maercker and colleagues described the development of this ICD-11 grouping around clinical utility and global applicability. Its structure makes the required relationship to a stressful or traumatic event explicit rather than treating stress-related conditions as a subdivision of a broader neurotic family.
F44 dissociative [conversion] disorders → Dissociative disorders
ICD-10 used F44 for dissociative [conversion] disorders. ICD-11 retains dissociative disorders as a distinct grouping while substantially revising its organization. The historical language of hysteria and conversion no longer functions as a general umbrella.
Reed and colleagues’ ICD-11 overview explains that depersonalization-derealization disorder moved into the dissociative grouping and that the revised system includes dissociative neurological symptom disorder for neurological-type symptoms understood within the dissociative framework. This reflects a specific modern taxonomy rather than a revival of “hysterical neurosis.”
F45 somatoform disorders → Disorders of bodily distress or bodily experience
ICD-10 somatoform disorders were located at F45 within the old neurotic/stress-related/somatoform block. ICD-11 replaced that arrangement with the grouping Disorders of bodily distress or bodily experience. The central diagnosis of bodily distress disorder is defined through distressing bodily symptoms and excessive attention directed toward them, rather than through the old requirement that symptoms be medically unexplained.
Gureje and Reed describe the rationale for bodily distress disorder and the problems the revision was intended to address in older somatoform classifications. The shift illustrates a broader ICD-11 pattern: former “neurotic” territory was redefined using more specific clinical constructs, not merely relabeled.
F48 other neurotic disorders → split, relocated, or reconceptualized
The fate of F48 is especially revealing because it contained residual categories that preserved older neurotic language. ICD-10 F48 included neurasthenia and depersonalization-derealization syndrome among other conditions. ICD-11 does not preserve F48 as an “other neurotic disorders” container.
Depersonalization-derealization disorder is placed with dissociative disorders in ICD-11. Reed and colleagues also explain that the concept represented by ICD-10 neurasthenia is incorporated into the ICD-11 bodily distress framework rather than retained as the same stand-alone neurotic category. These changes are not one-to-one translations: a person once labeled with neurasthenia cannot be assumed to meet current criteria for bodily distress disorder.
Hypochondriasis did not simply remain a somatoform or neurotic disorder
ICD-10 placed hypochondriacal disorder within F45 somatoform disorders. In ICD-11, hypochondriasis is classified within the obsessive-compulsive or related disorders grouping. The ICD-11 revision overview specifically identifies this reassignment.
This move is a useful demonstration of why “neurosis became anxiety” is inadequate. A historically neurotic or somatoform concept could be moved into an obsessive-compulsive spectrum grouping when the revised evidence and clinical logic supported that placement.
A practical historical crosswalk: old labels and modern destinations
Older records and texts may use labels that look familiar but belong to a different diagnostic language. The following translations show likely historical lineages without claiming diagnostic identity.
Anxiety neurosis
“Anxiety neurosis” historically referred to anxiety-centered presentations, with different meanings across psychoanalytic and psychiatric traditions. Modern classification divides anxiety phenomena into specific diagnoses and groupings. In ICD-11, anxiety or fear-related disorders form their own family; the old umbrella label does not determine which current diagnosis, if any, applies.
Phobic neurosis
Phobic neurosis belongs to the history of phobic classification. Modern ICD-11 differentiates specific phobia, social anxiety disorder, agoraphobia, and other anxiety or fear-related conditions through their own diagnostic requirements. The modern grouping preserves clinically recognizable lineages while abandoning the older neurosis framework.
Obsessional or obsessive-compulsive neurosis
The strongest modern lineage is toward OCD, but the relationship is historical rather than synonymous. ICD-11 OCD is classified among obsessive-compulsive or related disorders and is diagnosed using current requirements. A psychoanalytic description of obsessional neurosis cannot be converted mechanically into an ICD-11 OCD diagnosis.
Traumatic neurosis
Traumatic neurosis is a historical term used in different periods for post-traumatic symptom patterns. Modern ICD-11 uses defined diagnoses within disorders specifically associated with stress, including PTSD and complex PTSD. Historical case material can illuminate genealogy, but the old label does not establish that a person would meet modern PTSD or complex PTSD criteria.
Hysterical or conversion neurosis
Hysterical and conversion neurosis covered heterogeneous phenomena. Modern classification separates dissociative presentations from neurological-type functional symptoms and from other conditions. ICD-11’s dissociative neurological symptom disorder occupies part of this lineage, while other historical “hysterical” cases would map elsewhere or nowhere under current criteria.
Neurasthenia
Neurasthenia survived into ICD-10 as F48.0, but ICD-11 does not retain the same stand-alone neurotic diagnosis. Its historical territory intersects with bodily distress, fatigue, mood, anxiety, sleep, neurological, medical, and culturally shaped presentations. Any modern interpretation must therefore begin with the actual symptoms and exclusions rather than treating neurasthenia as an obsolete name for one current disorder.
Depressive neurosis
Depressive neurosis belongs to an older diagnostic and psychodynamic vocabulary. Current depressive disorders are classified on their own terms. The historical label cannot be translated automatically into major depressive disorder, dysthymic disorder, persistent depressive presentations, adjustment disorder, or any single ICD-11 diagnosis.
Why WHO moved away from neurosis
The change was not simply a stylistic preference for newer words. The ICD-11 Reference Guide directly connects the chapter architecture to scientific validity and clinical utility. It identifies neurosis as an example of an antiquated concept with poor construct and predictive validity and explains that the revised coding structure allowed more disorder groupings to be represented.
Construct validity asks whether a category coherently represents the phenomenon it claims to classify. Predictive validity asks whether the category helps predict clinically meaningful features such as course, correlates, or response patterns. A single neurosis umbrella had become too heterogeneous for those purposes: it could gather fear, compulsions, dissociation, bodily symptoms, trauma responses, depressive states, and residual conditions whose relationships were better represented in separate groupings.
Clinical utility was equally important. A classification must help clinicians recognize conditions, communicate, choose appropriate assessment pathways, and record health information consistently across settings. More specific groupings can provide clearer boundaries and more usable diagnostic guidance than a broad historical umbrella.
The ICD-11 project also pursued global applicability. The WHO CDDR were developed through multidisciplinary work involving hundreds of experts and thousands of clinicians. That process does not make every classification question permanently settled, but it explains why ICD-11’s architecture should be read as a deliberate redesign rather than a casual deletion of terminology.
What ICD-11 did not do
It did not declare that all neurosis was really anxiety
Anxiety disorders inherited part of the historical territory, but OCD, stress-related disorders, dissociation, bodily distress, and other categories inherited other parts. The old umbrella was too broad for a single modern successor.
It did not turn a psychoanalytic theory into a diagnostic rule
Psychoanalytic concepts of neurosis concern conflict, defense, repression, symptom formation, character, and other theoretical mechanisms. ICD-11 is a diagnostic classification, not a codification of one psychodynamic theory. A psychoanalytic formulation can coexist with a current diagnosis in clinical practice, but the two answer different questions.
It did not make historical diagnoses retrospectively wrong
A diagnosis is made within the knowledge, categories, and rules of its time. Calling an ICD-9 or ICD-10 diagnosis historical today does not mean the clinician necessarily misused the classification then. It means the classification system has changed. Historical accuracy requires preserving the edition and period in which the label was assigned.
It did not create one exact modern equivalent for every old label
Diagnostic systems change by splitting, merging, moving, redefining, and retiring categories. As a result, historical crosswalks are many-to-many. One old diagnosis can map to several modern possibilities, and one modern diagnosis can have more than one historical precursor.
ICD-11 and DSM-5-TR reached a similar endpoint by different routes
The DSM and ICD should not be treated as if they removed neurosis at the same time. American psychiatry’s decisive structural break occurred with DSM-III in 1980, when the manual moved toward explicit operational criteria and away from neurosis as a governing diagnostic framework. The cluster article Why DSM-III Removed Neurosis: The Shift to Operational Diagnosis covers that history.
ICD followed a different sequence. ICD-9 still had an explicit neurotic-disorders category. ICD-10 rejected the neurosis–psychosis division as a main organizing principle but retained “neurotic” in F40–F48. ICD-11 then removed the mixed neurotic block and redistributed its territory into contemporary groupings.
Today, neither DSM-5-TR nor ICD-11 offers one current umbrella diagnosis called neurosis. The details of how the two systems express current diagnoses still differ, and the systems should be cited by edition. For a direct comparison, see Is Neurosis Still a Diagnosis? DSM-5-TR, ICD-11, and Modern Psychiatry.
A crucial nuance: ICD-11 can still preserve legacy neurosis terms as inclusion terms
Removing neurosis as an organizing diagnosis does not mean every historical expression containing the word disappeared from ICD-11 terminology. In the current ICD-11 Mortality and Morbidity Statistics release, legacy expressions can remain attached to specific modern diagnoses as inclusion or index terms. For example, the WHO browser indexes “anxiety neurosis” under generalized anxiety disorder and “obsessive-compulsive neurosis” under obsessive-compulsive disorder. These terms help users find the appropriate modern category; they do not recreate a diagnostic family called neurosis.
The distinction is built into ICD conventions. The WHO ICD-11 Reference Guide explains that inclusion terms are additional diagnostic terms, examples, or synonyms that guide users to the content of a category; they are not a sub-classification of that category. A legacy expression can therefore survive as terminology while the historical umbrella concept itself has been abandoned.
This is the most precise way to state what happened in ICD-11: neurosis disappeared as a governing current diagnostic category and chapter structure, while selected historical neurosis labels can remain searchable beneath specific modern diagnoses. Classification status and terminology status are not the same thing.
Does the word “neurosis” still have any legitimate use?
Yes, but its role must be stated. “Neurosis” remains legitimate when discussing the history of psychiatry, psychoanalytic theory, specific historical diagnoses, archival records, or the evolution of diagnostic classification. It may also appear informally in everyday language, although that use is often vague and can become stigmatizing when applied to a person.
What the word no longer provides in ICD-11 is a unitary current clinical diagnosis. Seeing “neurosis” in an old chart, a psychoanalytic text, a dictionary, an index term, or a contemporary informal discussion does not mean ICD-11 has restored it as a modern disorder category.
The broader family of historical forms is reviewed in Types of Neurosis: Historical Categories and Their Modern Equivalents, which separates historical labels from the modern diagnoses that may overlap with parts of their former territory.
How to interpret an old diagnosis of neurosis today
If an older medical record says “neurosis,” “neurotic disorder,” “anxiety neurosis,” “depressive neurosis,” “hysterical neurosis,” “obsessional neurosis,” or another historical form, the safest interpretation starts with the original classification and the clinical description used at that time.
First, identify the date and system. ICD-9, ICD-10, DSM-II, a national modification, and a psychoanalytic case formulation can use similar words differently. Second, recover the original symptoms, duration, functional impairment, context, and exclusions whenever the record contains them. Third, separate the old label from any current diagnostic question. Fourth, if a present-day clinical diagnosis is needed, apply current ICD-11 or DSM-5-TR requirements to the person’s current presentation rather than translating the historical word by dictionary substitution.
This approach protects both historical accuracy and clinical accuracy. It also prevents a common error in health information work: treating a legacy code as though it were an exact synonym for a modern code.
What this means clinically
For a modern reader, the practical consequence is simple: “neurosis” by itself does not tell you what current condition a person has. Similar experiences can arise in anxiety disorders, OCD, trauma-related disorders, dissociative disorders, depressive disorders, bodily distress presentations, personality-related patterns, medical conditions, substance effects, medication effects, sleep disorders, and other contexts.
Current assessment therefore focuses on the actual presentation: what symptoms occur, when they began, how long they last, what triggers or maintains them, how much they impair daily life, what medical or substance-related explanations must be considered, and which current diagnostic requirements are met. A historical label can provide context, but it cannot substitute for that assessment.
Treatment follows the same principle. Modern treatment decisions target the identified condition, symptom pattern, and individual needs rather than a generic disease entity called neurosis. Someone with panic disorder, OCD, PTSD, dissociative symptoms, or bodily distress should not be assumed to need the same intervention merely because older literature might once have placed these presentations somewhere under a neurotic umbrella.
Common misconceptions about neurosis and ICD-11
“ICD-11 renamed neurosis as anxiety disorder.”
No. Anxiety or fear-related disorders are one destination for part of the historical territory. Other parts moved to obsessive-compulsive or related disorders, stress-related disorders, dissociative disorders, bodily distress or bodily experience disorders, and other modern categories.
“ICD-10 and ICD-11 use neurosis in the same way.”
No. ICD-10 retained “neurotic” in the F40–F48 block title even after rejecting the neurosis–psychosis distinction as its main organizing logic. ICD-11 reorganized that territory and no longer uses a comparable neurotic-disorders block.
“If an old chart says neurosis, I can convert it to one ICD-11 code.”
Usually not. Historical labels were broader and often theory-laden. Accurate modern classification requires the underlying symptoms and current diagnostic requirements, not a one-word crosswalk.
“Obsessional neurosis is just the old name for OCD.”
The terms overlap historically, but they are not identical concepts. Current OCD is a defined diagnosis in the ICD-11 obsessive-compulsive or related disorders grouping. Obsessional neurosis in psychoanalytic theory carried additional assumptions that are not part of current diagnostic requirements.
“Hysterical neurosis became one modern disorder.”
No. Historical hysteria covered a heterogeneous territory. Modern dissociative and neurological-symptom classifications divide that territory differently, and some historical cases may fit other diagnoses or none.
“Removing neurosis means psychiatry says the symptoms were imaginary.”
No. Classification reform concerns how disorders are defined and grouped. Anxiety, compulsions, trauma responses, dissociation, bodily distress, and related suffering remain clinically real phenomena. Removing an umbrella category changes taxonomy, not the reality of the person’s experience.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is neurosis a diagnosis in ICD-11?
Neurosis is not a unitary current diagnostic category or organizing umbrella in ICD-11. WHO’s Reference Guide cites neurosis as an antiquated concept with poor construct and predictive validity when explaining the redesign of Chapter 06. Selected legacy expressions containing “neurosis” can still appear as inclusion or index terms under specific current diagnoses; those terms do not restore neurosis as a diagnosis.
What replaced neurosis in ICD-11?
No single diagnosis replaced it. The former territory is distributed across several groupings, especially 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 happened to ICD-10 F40–F48 in ICD-11?
The mixed ICD-10 block was broken apart. Anxiety and fear-related disorders became a dedicated grouping; OCD moved into obsessive-compulsive or related disorders; stress-related disorders received their own grouping; dissociative disorders were reorganized; and somatoform/neurasthenic territory was substantially reconceptualized within bodily distress-related classification.
Did ICD-10 still use neurosis?
ICD-10 did not use the traditional neurosis–psychosis division as its major organizing principle, but it retained “neurotic” in the F40–F48 block title and in some legacy terminology. That is why ICD-10 is best understood as a transitional stage.
When did ICD-11 take effect?
WHO states that ICD-11 was adopted by the 72nd World Health Assembly in May 2019 and came into effect as the basis for international health reporting in January 2022. The clinical CDDR manual for mental, behavioral, or neurodevelopmental disorders was published in March 2024.
Is neuroticism the ICD-11 replacement for neurosis?
No. Neuroticism is a personality-trait construct used in personality psychology. It is not a replacement diagnosis for the historical psychiatric umbrella term neurosis.
Does an old neurosis diagnosis tell me what diagnosis I have now?
No. It can provide historical information, but modern diagnosis depends on current symptoms, duration, impairment, context, exclusions, differential diagnosis, and the requirements of the current classification system.
Why did ICD-11 abandon neurosis?
WHO’s stated rationale is that ICD-11 should reflect current evidence about relationships among disorders rather than older concepts with poor construct and predictive validity, while improving clinical utility. A more flexible coding architecture also allowed more coherent disorder groupings.
The modern meaning of the change
The disappearance of neurosis from ICD-11 is best understood as a change in the architecture of psychiatric knowledge. A historically broad category was dismantled because the phenomena within it could be described and grouped more precisely. The word survives as history, theory, and sometimes informal language; the diagnostic system no longer asks clinicians to place all of those phenomena inside one neurotic family.
That is the central answer to what happened to neurosis in ICD-11: it was not converted into a single successor diagnosis. Its former diagnostic territory was redistributed across multiple modern categories, and the criteria for those categories now determine diagnosis.
Related Articles
References
Gaebel, W., Stricker, J., & Kerst, A. (2020). Changes from ICD-10 to ICD-11 and future directions in psychiatric classification. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 22(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/wgaebel
Gureje, O., & Reed, G. M. (2016). Bodily distress disorder in ICD-11: Problems and prospects. World Psychiatry, 15(3), 291–292. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20353
Kogan, C. S., Stein, D. J., Maj, M., First, M. B., Emmelkamp, P. M. G., & Reed, G. M. (2016). The classification of anxiety and fear-related disorders in the ICD-11. Depression and Anxiety, 33(12), 1141–1154. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22530
Maercker, A., Brewin, C. R., Bryant, R. A., Cloitre, M., van Ommeren, M., Jones, L. M., Humayan, A., Kagee, A., Llosa, A. E., Rousseau, C., Somasundaram, D. J., Souza, R., Suzuki, Y., Weissbecker, I., Wessely, S. C., First, M. B., & Reed, G. M. (2013). Diagnosis and classification of disorders specifically associated with stress: Proposals for ICD-11. World Psychiatry, 12(3), 198–206. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20057
Rebello, T. J., Keeley, J. W., Kogan, C. S., et al. (2019). Anxiety and fear-related disorders in the ICD-11: Results from a global case-controlled field study. Archives of Medical Research, 50(8), 490–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arcmed.2019.12.012
Reed, G. M., First, M. B., Kogan, C. S., Hyman, S. E., Gureje, O., Gaebel, W., Maj, M., Stein, D. J., Maercker, A., Tyrer, P., et al. (2019). Innovations and changes in the ICD-11 classification of mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders. World Psychiatry, 18(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20611
Stein, D. J., Kogan, C. S., Atmaca, M., Fineberg, N. A., Fontenelle, L. F., Grant, J. E., Matsunaga, H., Reddy, Y. C. J., Simpson, H. B., Thomsen, P. H., van den Heuvel, O. A., Veale, D., Woods, D. W., & Reed, G. M. (2016). The classification of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders in the ICD-11. Journal of Affective Disorders, 190, 663–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2015.10.061
World Health Organization. (1992). The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders: Clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9241544228
World Health Organization. (2022). ICD-11 fact sheet. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/icd-11
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
World Health Organization. (2025). ICD-11 Reference Guide, Chapter 06: Mental, behavioural or neurodevelopmental disorders. https://icdcdn.who.int/icd11referenceguide/en-2025-01/refguide.pdf
World Health Organization. (2026). ICD-11 for Mortality and Morbidity Statistics, 2026-01 release. https://icd.who.int/browse/2026-01/mms/en