Following approval of the ICD‐11 by the World Health Assembly in May 2019, World Health Organization (WHO) member states will transition from the ICD‐10 to the ICD‐11, with reporting of health statistics based on the new system to begin on January 1, 2022. The WHO Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse will publish Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines (CDDG) for ICD‐11 Mental, Behavioural and Neurodevelopmental Disorders following ICD‐11’s approval. The development of the ICD‐11 CDDG over the past decade, based on the principles of clinical utility and global applicability, has been the most broadly international, multilingual, multidisciplinary and participative revision process ever implemented for a classification of mental disorders. Innovations in the ICD‐11 include the provision of consistent and systematically characterized information, the adoption of a lifespan approach, and culture‐related guidance for each disorder. Dimensional approaches have been incorporated into the classification, particularly for personality disorders and primary psychotic disorders, in ways that are consistent with current evidence, are more compatible with recovery‐based approaches, eliminate artificial comorbidity, and more effectively capture changes over time. Here we describe major changes to the structure of the ICD‐11 classification of mental disorders as compared to the ICD‐10, and the development of two new ICD‐11 chapters relevant to mental health practice. We illustrate a set of new categories that have been added to the ICD‐11 and present the rationale for their inclusion. Finally, we provide a description of the important changes that have been made in each ICD‐11 disorder grouping. This information is intended to be useful for both clinicians and researchers in orienting themselves to the ICD‐11 and in preparing for implementation in their own professional contexts.
Floods are the most common type of global natural disaster. Floods have a negative impact on mental health. Comprehensive evaluation and review of the literature are lacking. To systematically map and review available scientific evidence on mental health impacts of floods caused by extended periods of heavy rain in river catchments. We performed a systematic mapping review of published scientific literature in five languages for mixed studies on floods and mental health. PUBMED and Web of Science were searched to identify all relevant articles from 1994 to May 2014 (no restrictions). The electronic search strategy identified 1331 potentially relevant papers. Finally, 83 papers met the inclusion criteria. Four broad areas are identified: i) the main mental health disorders—post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety; ii] the factors associated with mental health among those affected by floods; iii) the narratives associated with flooding, which focuses on the long-term impacts of flooding on mental health as a consequence of the secondary stressors; and iv) the management actions identified. The quantitative and qualitative studies have consistent findings. However, very few studies have used mixed methods to quantify the size of the mental health burden as well as exploration of in-depth narratives. Methodological limitations include control of potential confounders and short-term follow up. Floods following extreme events were excluded from our review. Although the level of exposure to floods has been systematically associated with mental health problems, the paucity of longitudinal studies and lack of confounding controls precludes strong conclusions. We recommend that future research in this area include mixed-method studies that are purposefully designed, using more rigorous methods. Studies should also focus on vulnerable groups and include analyses of policy and practical responses.