Purpose of reviewTo increase the expert knowledge-base on intellectual developmental disorders (IDDs) by investigating the typology trajectories of consensus formation in the classification systems up to the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). This expert review combines an analysis of key recent literature and the revision of the consensus formation and contestation in the expert committees contributing to the classification systems since the 1950s.Recent findingsHistorically two main approaches have contributed to the development of this knowledge-base: a neurodevelopmental–clinical approach and a psychoeducational–social approach. These approaches show a complex interaction throughout the history of IDD and have had a diverse influence on its classification. Although in theory Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)-5 and ICD adhere to the neurodevelopmental–clinical model, the new definition in the ICD-11 follows a restrictive normality approach to intellectual quotient and to the measurement of adaptive behaviour. On the contrary DSM-5 is closer to the recommendations made by the WHO ‘Working Group on Mental Retardation’ for ICD-11 for an integrative approach.SummaryA cyclical pattern of consensus formation has been identified in IDD. The revision of the three major classification systems in the last decade has increased the terminological and conceptual variability and the overall scientific contestation on IDD.
Current Opinion in Psychiatry – Wolters Kluwer Health
Published: Mar 1, 2018
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera