Improving the DSM-5 approach to cognitive impairment: Developmental prosopagnosia reveals the need for tailored diagnoses.

ABSTRACT

The Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) recommends diagnosing neurocognitive disorders (i.e., cognitive impairment) when a patient scores beyond - 1 SD below neurotypical norms on two tests. I review how this approach will fail due to cognitive tests' power limitations, validity issues, imperfect reliabilities, and biases, before summarizing their resulting negative consequences. As a proof of concept, I use developmental prosopagnosia, a condition characterized by difficulties recognizing faces, to show the DSM-5 only diagnoses 62-70% (n1 = 61, n2 = 165) versus 100% (n1 = 61) through symptoms alone. Pooling the DSM-5 missed cases confirmed the presence of group-level impairments on objective tests, which were further evidenced through meta-analyses, thus validating their highly atypical symptoms. These findings support a paradigm shift towards bespoke diagnostic approaches for distinct cognitive impairments, including a symptom-based method when validated effective. I reject dogmatic adherence to the DSM-5 approach to neurocognitive disorders, and underscore the importance of a data driven, transdiagnostic approach to understanding patients' subjective cognitive impairments. This will ultimately benefit patients, their families, clinicians, and scientific progress.