Tracking Scientific Interest in the Dissociative Disorders: A Study of Scientific Publication Output 1984–2003Pope Jr. H.G. · Barry S. · Bodkin A. · Hudson J.I.
Biological Psychiatry Laboratory, McLean Hospital, and Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Belmont, Mass., USA
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Objective: We attempted to track scientific interest in dissociative amnesia and dissociative identity disorder by estimating the annual output of publications regarding these entities over the last 20 years. Methods: Using a standard medical index, PsycINFO, we counted the number of indexed publications involving dissociative amnesia and dissociative identity disorder listed for each year. We then compared these rates with those of well-established diagnoses such as anorexia nervosa, alcohol abuse, and schizophrenia. We also systematically reviewed all publications involving dissociative amnesia that appeared in 2003. Results: Annual publications involving dissociative amnesia and dissociative identity disorder rose from low levels in the 1980’s to a sharp peak in the mid 1990’s, followed by an equally sharp decline to only about one quarter of their peak levels by 2002 and 2003. In contrast, all of the 25 comparison diagnoses in our survey showed constant or steadily rising publication rates; none showed the ‘bubble’ pattern of the dissociative disorders. Of the 34 papers involving dissociative amnesia identified by PsycINFO for 2003, 10 (32%) appeared skeptical of the validity of dissociative amnesia and/or recovered-memory therapy. Despite a detailed search using multiple medical indices and search terms, we could find only 13 explicit cases of individuals with dissociative amnesia worldwide in the 2003 literature. Conclusions: Dissociative amnesia and dissociative identity disorderhave not generated consistent scientific interest over the years, but instead apparently enjoyed a brief period of fashion that now has waned. Overall, our observations suggest that these diagnostic entities presently do not command widespread scientific acceptance.
© 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.