{"title":"A narrative review of nosology and the concept of schizophrenia: criticism and proposal.","authors":"Ricardo Abreu Feijo de Mello, Ary Gadelha, Larissa Leal Freitas, Vitoria Fernandes Sant'Ana, Marcelo Feijó Mello","doi":"10.31744/einstein_journal/2025RW1131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Schizophrenia diagnostics have evolved to adapt to clinical needs and scientific advances, and the current denominations emerged at the beginning of the twentieth century. Most problems arise while integrating clinical experiences, based on historical psychopathological descriptions, with emerging translational neuroscience research. This study aimed to evaluate the state-of-the-art critics of the current schizophrenia concept and their recommendations for new concepts. We performed a narrative review of the literature and searched for studies published in English in PubMed in the last 2 years which discussed the diagnosis of schizophrenia. Two authors independently selected the studies after analyzing the abstracts. Subsequently, studies were selected for this review by consensus. Twenty-six studies were selected, and all authors, except two, had restrictions on the current categorical model for the diagnosis of schizophrenia owing to the heterogeneity of symptomatology and high frequency of comorbidity. Eight studies proposed changes to the concept of schizophrenia. The central proposition was to adopt psychotic syndrome as a core feature instead of the current concept of schizophrenia. We synthesize these proposals using psychosis as a spectrum that includes schizophrenia as a more severe case at the end of the spectrum.</p>","PeriodicalId":47359,"journal":{"name":"Einstein-Sao Paulo","volume":"23 ","pages":"eRW1131"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Einstein-Sao Paulo","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31744/einstein_journal/2025RW1131","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Schizophrenia diagnostics have evolved to adapt to clinical needs and scientific advances, and the current denominations emerged at the beginning of the twentieth century. Most problems arise while integrating clinical experiences, based on historical psychopathological descriptions, with emerging translational neuroscience research. This study aimed to evaluate the state-of-the-art critics of the current schizophrenia concept and their recommendations for new concepts. We performed a narrative review of the literature and searched for studies published in English in PubMed in the last 2 years which discussed the diagnosis of schizophrenia. Two authors independently selected the studies after analyzing the abstracts. Subsequently, studies were selected for this review by consensus. Twenty-six studies were selected, and all authors, except two, had restrictions on the current categorical model for the diagnosis of schizophrenia owing to the heterogeneity of symptomatology and high frequency of comorbidity. Eight studies proposed changes to the concept of schizophrenia. The central proposition was to adopt psychotic syndrome as a core feature instead of the current concept of schizophrenia. We synthesize these proposals using psychosis as a spectrum that includes schizophrenia as a more severe case at the end of the spectrum.