Assessing Depression & Accuracy of Mental Illness Diagnosis in the Context of Life

What is the difference between having a short-term, emotional crisis, an adjustment disorder, and long-term clinical depression? Well, in the hands of a sloppy mental health professional, the answer might be “nothing” — all three might be diagnosed as “major depression.” But is this really sloppy diagnosis (or, as researchers would call it, a “diagnostic challenge”), or a simple result of how mental health is typically reimbursed in the U.S.?

Researchers Monroe & Reid (2009) argue that clinicians and researchers need to do a better job in evaluating depression in context of a person’s life stress. Without doing so, they argue “one cannot determine whether or not the presenting condition represents an understandable response to adversity, an adjustment disorder, or a clinical syndrome indicative of a true psychological disorder.”

Not everyone develops depression after experiencing life stress. The researchers note there are many possible explanations for this, ranging from social support (having a good network of friends and family around you), personality characteristics, and genetic predisposition to suffer from the ill effects of stress. The last factor suggests a strong genetic-environmental interaction. It’s not enough just to have the genes that may predispose you to depression, you also need the life stress as well.

While life stress may indeed be importantly related to how depression forms in some people, I’m not sure it matters as much when helping a person deal with a depressive episode. It’s fine to recognize life stress as a potential necessary but not sufficient trigger for future episodes, but it generally is unhelpful for the current episode.

That’s because clinicians don’t get paid due to the accuracy of their diagnoses, I hate to say. They only get paid if they diagnose a mental disorder that’s reimbursable (under most people’s insurance plans). Many of those plans only cover “major” mental disorder, not minor ones such as “adjustment disorder,” and definitely not someone who comes into therapy and only wants to talk about their “understandable response to adversity.” So clinicians will most often err on the side of the most reimbursable diagnosis, even if they know it may not be the most accurate diagnosis.

So while researchers can debate such finer points until the cows come home, this kind of differentiation illustrates why there can exist a gap between academicians/researchers and clinicians. Researchers sometimes appear to live in a world where theoretical accuracy models and distinct differentiation between disorders is a Holy Grail to be pursued.

Clinicians, however, live in the trenches — trying to help their clients with appropriate diagnoses (which may not always be the most accurate), but also needing to be paid for their services (since most people aren’t willing to pay out of pocket the $80 to $180/hour fee most clinicians charge). This is a far messier world where nice little well-defined diagnostic categories can so readily break down. But it’s the real world where science is put into use.

What’s the Importance of Accurate Mental Illness Diagnosis?

Accurate mental illness diagnosis is important in both research studies and clinical psychology, although for different reasons.

In research studies, accurate mental illness diagnosis is critical for ensuring that participants are appropriately selected and matched for comparison, and for ensuring the validity and generalizability of the results. Accurate diagnoses allow researchers to study specific mental illnesses and compare results across different studies, and also provide a common language for communication between researchers.

In clinical psychology, accurate mental illness diagnosis is important for providing effective treatment. A correct diagnosis allows a clinician to choose the most appropriate treatment approach based on evidence-based practices, which in turn can improve patient outcomes. An accurate diagnosis can also help a patient understand their condition, reduce stigma, and improve their ability to access appropriate care and support.

Overall, accurate mental illness diagnosis is important in both research and clinical psychology as it provides a common language for communication and a basis for effective treatment and understanding.

How Accurate is Mental Illness Diagnosis Today?

The accuracy of mental illness diagnosis between two sets of clinicians can vary. A number of factors can influence the accuracy of diagnosis, including the type of mental illness being diagnosed, the training and experience of the clinicians, the use of standardized diagnostic tools, and the availability of information about the patient’s history and symptoms.

Research suggests that diagnostic agreement between clinicians can range from fair to good, depending on the mental illness and the type of diagnostic evaluation used. For example, some mental illnesses, such as major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder, tend to have higher levels of diagnostic agreement than others, such as personality disorders.

The use of standardized diagnostic tools, such as structured diagnostic interviews or symptom rating scales, can improve the accuracy of diagnosis by providing a common language and set of criteria for evaluating patients. In addition, obtaining a comprehensive patient history and gathering information from multiple sources, such as family members or previous treatment providers, can provide a more complete picture of the patient’s symptoms and improve diagnostic accuracy.

Overall, while some level of diagnostic variability is expected, efforts to improve the accuracy of mental illness diagnosis, such as the use of standardized tools and a comprehensive evaluation process, can help to reduce variability and improve patient outcomes.

 

Reference:

Monroe, S.M. & Reid, M.W. (2009). Life stress and major depression. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(2), 68-72.