A systematic review and meta-analysis on the main purpose of diagnostic classification systems and their utility for various purposes

Introduction The development of the 11th edition International Classification Diseases has rekindled research interest surrounding diagnostic classification systems (DCSs). According to expert consensus, main purpose DCSs is provide guidance in clinical practice. There are no reviews international literature, however, assessing what mental health practitioners believe DCSs. Objectives aims this systematic review were assess professionals think single most important and how they rate DCSs’ utility for various purposes. All considered. Methods Two separate searches conducted Medline Via Ovid PsycInfo: one articles according studies on first search revealed eight second three their total number participants from all included was 9,276 2,363. clinicians a wide range world regions, languages, income-level countries. Results results meta-analyses showed that 44% (95%CI=38-49%) responders facilitating inter-clinician communication, 20% (4-35%) inform treatment decisions, 14% (11-16%) aid communication between patients, 11% (4-18%) reflect aetiology/pathogenesis, 9% (2-16%) facilitate research, 4% (2-7%) national statistical base 1% (0.1-2%) indicate prognosis. Regarding purposes, highest ratings given meeting administrative requirements two studies, diagnosis training third. Conclusions “Inter-clinician communication” voted rated relatively high tier utility. In contrast, “inform management decisions”, even though it as popular DCSs, placed bottom rating Interestingly, none asked whether “making diagnosis” Further needed expect so improve future. Disclosure Interest None Declared