aFaculté des Sciences Humaines, des Sciences de l’Education et des Sciences Sociales, Université du Luxembourg, Luxembourg bFaculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia Correspondence to Charles B. Pull, Faculté des Sciences Humaines, des Sciences de l’Education et des Sciences Sociales, Université du Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg. E-mail: [email protected]

In 2014, two classifications of mental disorders are known and used on an international level: the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or DSM, developed by the American Psychiatric Association and Chapter F, for Mental and Behavioural Disorders, of the International Classification of Diseases, developed by the World Health Organization. Whereas the 5th edition of the DSM has been approved by the APA and published in 2013, under the name DSM-5, the 11th revision of the ICD or ICD-11 is still a work in progress and all available information has still to be considered provisisonal at this time. The text presented here highlights the main commonalities and divergencies DSM-IV and ICD-10 and reports on those communalities and divergencies between DSM-5 and ICD-11 that seem to be final at this point in time. (C) 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Head of Department, Clinique des Troubles Emotionnels, Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg, Luxembourg city, Luxembourg Correspondence to Charles B. Pull, Clinique des Troubles Emotionnels, Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg, 4, rue Barblé, L-1210 Luxembourg, Luxembourg. E-mail: [email protected]

Purpose of review The present review examines the decision of the DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Working Group to retain or to remove specific personality disorders included in DSM-IV-TR and presents the reactions elicited by the decision and published between 10 February 2010 and 30 September 2012. Recent findings In the first draft of Chapter P (Personality disorders), posted on the DSM-5 Internet site on 10 February 2010, the DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Working Group proposed to remove paranoid, schizoid, histrionic, dependent and narcissistic personality disorders from the classification. A revised version of the draft, posted on the Internet in June 2011, reinstated narcissistic personality disorder but not the four remaining types that had been slated for removal. Underlying the decision of the Work Group for retaining versus removing specific personality disorder types are arguments concerning the clinical utility and validity of each type. The arguments provided by the Work Group have not been accepted unanimously by other personality disorder experts. Summary DSM-5 will retain six out of the 10 personality disorder types listed in DSM-IV-TR while removing the remaining four types. Reactions to the decision and to the arguments presented for doing so have been mixed.

OBJECTIVE:Excessive food intake has been linked to many factors including taste preference and the presence of psychopathology. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between sweet and salty taste preference and psychopathology in patients with severe obesity.METHODS:A consecutive series of patients applying for bariatric surgery was recruited for the study. Taste preference was self-reported. Psychopathology was assessed using the revised version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2). 190 patients were included in the study.RESULTS:In comparison with patients who had salty taste preference, patients with sweet taste preference had significantly higher elevations on the depression (OD: 4.090, p = 0.010) and the hysteria (OD: 2.951, p = 0.026) clinical scales of the MMPI-2.CONCLUSION:The results suggest the presence of an association between taste preference and psychopathology. The findings may be of interest for clinicians who are involved in the treatment of obesity. In particular, they may wish to pay increased attention to patients with sweet taste preference or who have a strong attraction for both sweet and salty foods, in order to detect psychopathology and to adapt the treatment.

Purpose of reviewThis review examines the current knowledge on public-speaking anxiety, that is, the fear of speaking in front of others. This article summarizes the findings from previous review articles and describes new research findings on basic science aspects, prevalence rates, classification, and treatment that have been published between August 2008 and August 2011.Recent findingsRecent findings highlight the major aspects of psychological and physiological reactivity to public speaking in individuals who are afraid to speak in front of others, confirm high prevalence rates of the disorder, contribute to identifying the disorder as a possibly distinct subtype of social anxiety disorder (SAD), and give support to the efficacy of treatment programs using virtual reality exposure and Internet-based self-help.SummaryPublic-speaking anxiety is a highly prevalent disorder, leading to excessive psychological and physiological reactivity. It is present in a majority of individuals with SAD and there is substantial evidence that it may be a distinct subtype of SAD. It is amenable to treatment including, in particular, new technologies such as exposure to virtual environments and the use of cognitive-behavioral self-help programs delivered on the Internet.

Purpose of review To examine techniques that have been used to assess various aspects of body-image perception and body-image attitudes in obesity. It summarizes findings from previous review articles and reports on new research findings that have been published between August 2007 and August 2010. Recent findings Body-image perception and attitudes in obesity have been assessed using questionnaires, figural drawing scales and computer morphing or adjustment programs. Most of these techniques have been developed to assess body image in eating disorders and as such are not specific to the assessment of body image in obesity. Summary Body-image perception and body-image attitudes are commonly assessed in research studies on obesity. However, currently available assessment instruments have not been developed specifically for use in obese populations and not all have been validated in these populations. Researchers should be careful in selecting assessment instruments that are appropriate for use in obesity.

Introduction Information on disability is an important component of health information, as it shows how well an individual is able to function in general areas of life. Along with traditional indicators of a population's health status, such as mortality and morbidity rates, disability has become important in measuring disease burden, in evaluating the effectiveness of health interventions and in planning health policy. Defining and measuring disability, however, has been challenging. The World Health Organization (WHO) has tried to address the problem by establishing an international classification scheme known as the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). (1) Nevertheless, all standard instruments for measuring disability and health need to be linked conceptually and operationally to the ICF to allow comparisons across different cultures and populations. To address this need for a standardized cross-cultural measurement of health status and in response to calls for improving the scope and cultural adaptability of the original World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS), (2-9) WHO developed a second version (WHODAS 2.0) as a general measure of functioning and disability in major life domains. This paper reports on the development strategy and the metric properties of the WHODAS 2.0. Conceptual framework for WHODAS 2.0 The WHODAS 2.0 is grounded in the conceptual framework of the ICF and captures an individual's level of functioning in six major life domains: (i) cognition (understanding and communication); (ii) mobility (ability to move and get around); (iii) self-care (ability to attend to personal hygiene, dressing and eating, and to live alone); (iv) getting along (ability to interact with other people); (v) life activities (ability to carry out responsibilities at home, work and school); (vi) in society (ability to engage in community, civil and recreational activities). All domains were developed from a comprehensive set of ICF items and made to correspond directly with ICF's activity and participation dimension (Table 1), which is applicable to any health condition. For all six domains, the WHODAS 2.0 provides a profile and a summary measure of functioning and disability that is reliable and applicable across cultures in adult populations. The WHODAS 2.0 is used for many purposes. It can be used for conducting population surveys, (10-15) for registers (16) and for monitoring individual patient outcomes in clinical practice and in clinical trials of treatment effects. (17-27) Methods The WHODAS 2.0 was constructed through a process involving extensive review and field-testing, as described in the following sections. Existing measures In preparation for the development of the WHODAS 2.0, we conducted a review of existing measurement instruments and of the literature on the conceptual aspects and measurement of functioning and disability. The instruments we chose included various measures of disability, handicap, quality of life and other aspects of health, such as the ability to perform the activities of daily living (including instrumental ones), as well as global and specific measures of well-being (including subjective well-being). (28,29) We compiled information from more than 300 instruments in a database showing a common pool of items, along with the origin and known psychometric properties of each instrument. An Instrument Development Task Force composed of international experts reviewed the database and pooled the items in it using the ICF as the common framework. Research study and field testing Since the WHODAS 2.0 was developed primarily to allow cross-cultural comparisons, it was based on an extensive cross-cultural study spanning 19 countries around the world. (30) The items included in the WHODAS 2.0 were selected after exploring how health status is assessed in different cultures through a process that involved linguistic analysis of health-related terms, interviews with key informants and focus group discussions, as well as qualitative methods (e. …

Purpose of reviewThe present editorial review examines current psychological assessment practices in obesity surgery programs, reasons for making such assessments and data obtained prior to surgery and during follow-up. It summarizes findings from previous review articles and reports on new research findings that have been published between August 2006 and August 2009.Recent findingsPatients with morbid obesity applying for weight loss are commonly administered extensive psychiatric and psychological assessment prior to surgery. Although the value of psychopathological factors for predicting weight loss and mental health after surgery remains controversial, the presence of psychopathology should be taken into account in the presurgery as well as in the postsurgery management of patients undergoing weight-loss surgery.SummaryMorbid obesity is associated with high rates of psychopathology, including depression, anxiety, eating disorders, abnormal personality traits and personality disorders. There is a decrease in psychopathology after obesity surgery in many, though not all, individuals. There is some evidence for poorer postsurgery outcome in individuals with significant presurgery psychopathology, but there is a clear need for more substantial information with regard to reliable psychological predictors of weight loss and mental health after surgery. Whatever the predictive value of psychopathology prior to surgery, it is essential to detect patients in need of psychiatric and/or psychological support after surgery.

Event Abstract Back to Event A Randomized Controlled Study of Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy and Cognitive-Behaviour Therapy in Panic Disorder with Agoraphobia Charles Pull1*, A. Pelissolo2, M. Zaoui3, M. C. Pull-Erpelding1, L. Wouters1, Gloria Aguayo1, M. Larcelet1, V. Genouilhac4, A. Duinat4, F. Znaid2, C. De Mey Guillard4, P. Panagiotaki3, F. Fanget4, E. Mollard4, S. Gaillard5, F. Gueyffier6, S. Roche6, R. Ecochrad6, A. Berthoz3, R. Jouvent2 and J. Cottraux4 1 Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg et Centre de Recherche Public Santé, Luxembourg 2 CHU Pitié Salpetrière, French Guiana 3 Collège de France, France 4 Unité de Traitement de l’Anxiété, France 5 CIC, Hôpital Cardiologique, France 6 Université Claude Bernard, France 92 patients presenting with Panic disorder with Agoraphobia were included in a randomized controlled trial comparing classical Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) to Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy (VRET) and a waiting list. There was no significant difference in outcome between VRET and CBT neither immediately after treatment nor at follow-up after 3, 6 and 12 months. Conference: Annual CyberTherapy and CyberPsychology 2009 conference, Villa Caramora, Italy, 21 Jun - 23 Jun, 2009. Presentation Type: Oral Presentation Topic: Oral Presentations Citation: Pull C, Pelissolo A, Zaoui M, Pull-Erpelding MC, Wouters L, Aguayo G, Larcelet M, Genouilhac V, Duinat A, Znaid F, De Mey Guillard C, Panagiotaki P, Fanget F, Mollard E, Gaillard S, Gueyffier F, Roche S, Ecochrad R, Berthoz A, Jouvent R and Cottraux J (2009). A Randomized Controlled Study of Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy and Cognitive-Behaviour Therapy in Panic Disorder with Agoraphobia. Front. Neuroeng. Conference Abstract: Annual CyberTherapy and CyberPsychology 2009 conference. doi: 10.3389/conf.neuro.14.2009.06.082 Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters. The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated. Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed. For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions. Received: 20 Mar 2009; Published Online: 20 Mar 2009. * Correspondence: Charles Pull, Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg et Centre de Recherche Public Santé, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, pull.charles@chl.lu Login Required This action requires you to be registered with Frontiers and logged in. To register or login click here. Abstract Info Abstract The Authors in Frontiers Charles Pull A. Pelissolo M. Zaoui M. C Pull-Erpelding L. Wouters Gloria Aguayo M. Larcelet V. Genouilhac A. Duinat F. Znaid C. De Mey Guillard P. Panagiotaki F. Fanget E. Mollard S. Gaillard F. Gueyffier S. Roche R. Ecochrad A. Berthoz R. Jouvent J. Cottraux Google Charles Pull A. Pelissolo M. Zaoui M. C Pull-Erpelding L. Wouters Gloria Aguayo M. Larcelet V. Genouilhac A. Duinat F. Znaid C. De Mey Guillard P. Panagiotaki F. Fanget E. Mollard S. Gaillard F. Gueyffier S. Roche R. Ecochrad A. Berthoz R. Jouvent J. Cottraux Google Scholar Charles Pull A. Pelissolo M. Zaoui M. C Pull-Erpelding L. Wouters Gloria Aguayo M. Larcelet V. Genouilhac A. Duinat F. Znaid C. De Mey Guillard P. Panagiotaki F. Fanget E. Mollard S. Gaillard F. Gueyffier S. Roche R. Ecochrad A. Berthoz R. Jouvent J. Cottraux PubMed Charles Pull A. Pelissolo M. Zaoui M. C Pull-Erpelding L. Wouters Gloria Aguayo M. Larcelet V. Genouilhac A. Duinat F. Znaid C. De Mey Guillard P. Panagiotaki F. Fanget E. Mollard S. Gaillard F. Gueyffier S. Roche R. Ecochrad A. Berthoz R. Jouvent J. Cottraux Related Article in Frontiers Google Scholar PubMed Abstract Close Back to top Javascript is disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser settings in order to see all the content on this page.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) is one of the several psychotherapies that have been described as 'third wave' cognitive behavioral therapies (CBTs). The present editorial review examines the current status of ACT with a focus on previous reviews, a meta-analysis and new studies that have been published between January 2006 and August 2008.RECENT FINDINGS:Recent studies on ACT suggest that ACT may be effective for a variety of disorders, including several anxiety disorders, depression, pain, trichotillomania, psychotic disorder, drug abuse and the management of epilepsy and diabetes.SUMMARY:The available evidence suggests that ACT works through different processes than active treatment comparisons, including traditional CBT. Although currently available data are promising, there is, however, a need for more well controlled studies to verify whether ACT is generally as or more effective than other active treatments across the range of problems examined.