Timeline revised but still no firm date for the DSM-5 third and final stakeholder review and comment period
Post #134 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-1JL
According to yesterday’s report from Deborah Brauser for Medscape Medical News (Concern Over Changes to Autism Criteria Unfounded, Says APA, January 25, 2012), the portion of the DSM-5 field trials conducted at academic centers concluded at the end of October.
The routine clinical settings field trials, scheduled to complete by December but extended in order that more participants might be recruited (DSM-5 Disorganization, Disarray, and Delays, Dr Dayle Jones, American Counseling Association, January 3, 2012), are now expected to complete in March, this year.
In November, DSM-5 Task Force Vice-chair, Darrel Regier, MD, predicted the pushing back of the final public feedback period from January–February, to “no later than May 2012″ (APA Answers DSM-5 Critics, Deborah Brauser, November 9, 2011), in response to timeline slippage.
I noticed, today, that the Timeline on the DSM-5 Development site has finally been updated to reflect a “Spring” posting of draft diagnostic criteria, for a two month long stakeholder review and comment period.
No dates appear to being publicly released, at this point, for this third and final public review.
The lack of advance dates presents barriers to public and professional participation.
Patient advocacy organizations need to alert their constituencies and their professional advisers whose opinions will inform consumer group submissions. Professional organizations and bodies who submit feedback in consultation with their memberships will also need to plan the sending out of timely alerts via newsletters and membership publications.
The second release of draft proposals was posted on May 4, last year, with no prior announcement or news release by APA and left many organizations and advocates, including myself, unprepared.
It is hoped that APA will give reasonable notice before releasing this third and final draft – though how much influence professional and public feedback might have at this late stage in the DSM-5 development process is moot.