ICD-11 Revision releases External review and Response: shifts projected WHA adoption to 2018

Post #321 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-44N

Update: August 6, 2015

ICD Revision has now published a revised Project Plan and Communication Schedule:

ICD Project Plan 2015 to 2018


As previously posted


And so it goes on…

The revision of ICD-10 and development of ICD-11 kicked off in April 2007. The original projected WHA adoption date was 2011/12 [1].

Then a shift to 2015, then to 2017.

WHO has just kicked the can further down the road to May 2018.

In July 2014, the World Health Organization (WHO) Office of the Assistant Director General, Health Systems and Innovation, posted a call for expressions of interest from suitable contractors to conduct an interim assessment of the 11th Revision for International Classification of Diseases (ICD).

External assessment was prompted by concerns raised by WHO Member States, UN Statistical Commission and other stakeholder organizations about the status of the revision and the utility of the ICD-11 product.

The External review of ICD-11 Revision’s progress has now been completed.

Last week, WHO quietly released a report on the status of the ICD revision process, its management and resources, the feasibility of meeting its goals and timelines, and its fitness for purpose.

The reviewers’ assessment and recommendations can be read here: External report

Read WHO’s initial response to the report’s findings and the actions ICD Revision proposes to take here: WHO Response to External Report

WHO says:

WHO welcomes the constructive messages of the Report of the ICD-11 Revision Review. WHO is initiating the second phase of the revision process, acting immediately on the Review’s recommendations.

A revised workplan will be formulated before the end of June and submitted for approval to the RSG-SEG. During 2015 the WHO secretariat will be strengthened in terms of project management, communication of progress and plans, documentation and transparency of decision-making and classification expertise, as recommended by the reviewers.

As I predicted, a further shift in the development timeline from WHA adoption in May 2017 to May 2018 is proposed, along with other measures.


1 Exhibit 1 WHO Letter August 2007
Letter Saxena, WHO, to Ritchie, IUPsyS (International Union for Psychological Science), August 2007

2 External Review ICD-11 (Consultancy Interim Assessment of 11th ICD Revision, January – March 2015)

3 WHO Response to External Review of ICD-11 (Initial WHO response to the report of the external review of the ICD-11 revision,Department of Health Statistics and Information Systems, May 12 2015)

Psychologists’ perspectives on the diagnostic classification of mental disorders: Results from the WHO-IUPsyS Global Survey

Post #263 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-3dj

Psychologists’ perspectives on the diagnostic classification of mental disorders: Results from the WHO-IUPsyS Global Survey

Int J Psychol. 2013 Jun 10. [Epub ahead of print]

Psychologists’ perspectives on the diagnostic classification of mental disorders: Results from the WHO-IUPsyS Global Survey.

Evans SC, Reed GM, Roberts MC, Esparza P, Watts AD, Correia JM, Ritchie P, Maj M, Saxena S.
a Clinical Child Psychology Program, University of Kansas, Lawrence , KS, USA.


This study examined psychologists’ views and practices regarding diagnostic classification systems for mental and behavioral disorders so as to inform the development of the ICD-11 by the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO and the International Union of Psychological Science (IUPsyS) conducted a multilingual survey of 2155 psychologists from 23 countries, recruited through their national psychological associations. Sixty percent of global psychologists routinely used a formal classification system, with ICD-10 used most frequently by 51% and DSM-IV by 44%. Psychologists viewed informing treatment decisions and facilitating communication as the most important purposes of classification, and preferred flexible diagnostic guidelines to strict criteria. Clinicians favorably evaluated most diagnostic categories, but identified a number of problematic diagnoses. Substantial percentages reported problems with crosscultural applicability and cultural bias, especially among psychologists outside the USA and Europe. Findings underscore the priority of clinical utility and professional and cultural differences in international psychology. Implications for ICD-11 development and dissemination are discussed.

PMID: 23750927

[PubMed – as supplied by publisher]


Slide Presentation: Aug 3, 2012

The WHO-IUPsyS Global Survey of Psychologists’ Attitudes Toward Mental Disorders Classification.

Download PDF WHO-IUPsyS Global Survey slides

More information on this WHO study can be found on Page 7 (3.) of this report:


2012 Annual Report of the International Union of Psychological Science to the American Psychological Association

Revision of World Health Organization’s ICD-10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders

Pierre L.-J. Ritchie, Ph.D., Main Representative to the World Health Organization, International Union of Psychological Science, January, 2013

Click link for PDF document    WHO-IUPsyS ICD Survey Report Report 2012

This report also sets out the responsibilities of ICD Revision working groups, on Page 3 (1.1), and gives some information on the field studies for ICD-11 and ICD11-PHC, on Page 8 (4.)


The earlier study: WPA-WHO Global Survey of Psychiatrists’ Attitudes Towards Mental Disorders Classification can be downloaded here: 

The WPA-WHO Global Survey of Psychiatrists’ Attitudes Towards Mental Disorders Classification

World Psychiatry 2011;10:118-131

Research report

Geoffrey M Reed, João Mendonça Correia, Patricia Esparza, Shekhar Saxena, Mario Maj


%d bloggers like this: