A note on the problem of self-diagnosis, or on attempts to recognize one’s own disorder on the basis of a comparison with the symptoms and writings found mainly on the internet.
Self-diagnosis
Current diagnosis (*)
Therapeutic self-indication
Obsession
Obsession
Clarification and reassurance on the content of the obsession
No
Dementia
Dementia
Depression, Obsessive Disorder
Character depression
Cyclothymia
Dependence
Detoxification
Controlled use
Motivation to get out
Care to feel good after quitting
Physical defects that cause depression
Dysmorphophobia
Correction of physical defect
Depression
Bipolar disorder
Depression from external events
Bipolar disorder
Social
phobia Social phobia, Bipolar disorder
Chronic depression, dysthymia
Attenuated bipolar spectrum disorder
Schizophrenia, Hallucinations, Mania suicide
Obsessive disorder
Assessments
Lack
of memory, attention problems
Investigations Panic
Attacks
Panic Attacks
What to Take in Case of Attack
Thought that Generates Anxiety
Obsessive Disorder
Reassurance, “exhaustive” clarification, detailed information
Depersonalization
Obsessive Disorder
Investigations
Unresolved symptom causing depression
Obsessive disorder, Hypochondria
Investigations and treatment of the symptom you are concerned about
ADHD, Asperger ‘s
Obsessive Disorder, Hypochondria
Investigations
Pending, by exclusion
Hypochondria
Reassurance by
exclusion caused by others
Paranoia
No
Psychosis
People who try to get an idea of ​​what they have mostly start with the idea of ​​calming down, that is, they hope to arrive at possible diagnoses that are quite mild and benign, and possibly also to avoid visits and treatments. The result is constantly the opposite: no one is reassured by looking on the internet, for one reason only, which is the spirit in which these searches are carried out. It is the same mechanism that guides the reading of the package leaflets. Generally, those who want to document do so in an anxious and typically obsessive manner. The information is collected with a more or less unconscious selection of the “worst” or “most particular” part, also because the search is carried out with the “keyword” mode on the search engine. Inserting a symptom and then looking for all the sites that talk about that symptom, or the diseases that appear in order on the search results, does not correspond to the process of approaching the diagnosis. Search engines are self-referential, that is, they sort the results according to a “strong” parameter that and how much that site or the words of that site are searched and consulted. The orders change according to hypochondriac fashions, and thus amplify the collective hypochondria. The mass media present what is “talked about” and what is talked about is in the mass media. All this is not diagnosis. that is, they sort the results on the basis of a certain “strong” parameter that and how much that site or the words of that site are searched and consulted. The orders change according to hypochondriac fashions, and thus amplify the collective hypochondria. The mass media present what is “talked about” and what is talked about is in the mass media. All this is not diagnosis. that is, they sort the results on the basis of a certain “strong” parameter that and how much that site or the words of that site are searched and consulted. The orders change according to hypochondriac fashions, and thus amplify the collective hypochondria. The mass media present what is “talked about” and what is talked about is in the mass media. All this is not diagnosis.
In addition to this, it is clear that a diagnosis cannot be made due to a lack of technical skills and professional experience, but it is not only this. If this were the case, people would simply not make a diagnosis and would be lost in the face of a flood of symptoms and ailments in which they cannot find their way. Instead, people tend to have different self-diagnoses depending on the disorder they actually have.
The diagram above attempts to give an overview, but it should be read in the following way: people who present themselves with a self-diagnosis (or an impression) obtained from reading articles or lists of symptoms (usually on sites) are then have the diagnoses that are reported in the second column. Of course, the diagnoses of the second column are not made on the basis of the first column, although in the future it is not excluded that the type of self-diagnosis will also become a useful criterion for addressing the diagnosis. It already happens, for example, in the diagnosis of hyperalimentation disorder, one of whose operational criteria is precisely the interest and tendency to ask for slimming treatments, that is, a type of therapeutic “question” of the patient has a value as a sign of a specific disorder. the same could be said for the ”
So, as a preliminary recommendation, this is not a tool for self-diagnosis based on previous self-diagnoses. It is a synthesis of the experience on self-diagnosis, therefore provisional and to be reviewed, which, however, if one takes note is largely simply and coherent with the type of diagnosis then made. For example, the psychotic patient in no way qualifies her condition (nothing) or refers it to external factors as the cause of obviously non-psychotic symptoms (depression, anxiety, stress, etc. but without identifying her own delirium). Conversely, the obsessive patient tends to make all kinds of diagnoses, from bodily ones to “mental” ones, and often in every field he or she gets to select particular syndromes, with two criteria: the name “curious” and the malignancy and therefore the fright that this diagnosis produces (some frequent are Asperger’s, fatal familial insomnia, multiple sclerosis, HIV / AIDS). The obsessive patient will also go to make paradoxical diagnoses, such as: “of the twenty symptoms listed, I have a precise one”, or “I have no symptoms but I have read that there are forms without symptoms, so it must be my case” .
Bipolar patients do not recognize their disorder immediately, or rather focus attention on the anxious or depressive part, as a type of symptoms, and make it equivalent to a diagnosis. Often when they recognize that they have bipolar disorder, more or less attenuated, they talk about it as if they have that on one side, anxiety and depression on the other as separate or independent elements. Therefore, the typical presentation of long-lasting bipolar disorders are “depression” of various types, because the person believes that this is the center of the problem and in any case the first aspect to be addressed directly. Usually he becomes an expert on antidepressants and even if he documents all the drugs he still tends to search for the antidepressant that is right for him.
Patients with substance abuse, when they are addicted, generally tend to reject this concept of disease, and place the disease only where there is use and intoxication, otherwise they feel that they are cured when they do not use, or in any case not dependent as first. This results in failure to prevent relapse, which is not an optional element, but is safe when the diagnosis is made.
The third column shows the therapeutic “questions”. As you can see, they are in line with self-diagnosis, even when self-diagnosis was “right”. In other words, even when those who have panic correctly recognize panic, the therapeutic question is not that of a basic cure, but of a cure as needed against the attack, and usually not against agoraphobia. The vision of the disorder is therefore focused on the attack, on the phobia of the attack, and therefore there is no space to plan a basic cure that prevents it, as if the prospect of living without attacks was not considered probable, or in any case the attention was focused on the attacks from time to time.
Similarly, the obsessive patient may recognize obsessions as such, but then his “question” is about the content, that is, the reassurance that it will not happen or that what he fears is not true. If the patient is upset about this, that is, reassurance is not provided to avoid inevitably feeding the cycle of obsessive thought, he may get angry and consider the doctor “non-human”, “superficial” or think that he did not want to satisfy him with exhaustive explanations .
Personal suggestions and contributions are welcome to further refine the self-diagnosis statistics.
That is: before receiving the current diagnosis from the psychiatrist, what diagnosis did you make yourself, or did you fear or thought you had