Volume_4_Issue_3_Digest

42 TPC D igest apparent, if published at all. Standards related to the alignment of the instruments with the DSM symptoms (i.e., evidence based on test content) were circumspect. Overall, compared to the emotional and behavioral symptoms included in the DSM-5 diagnoses, these Level 2 measures lack many crucial criteria, thereby inadequately addressing validity evidence based on test content. The Level 2 measures are fairly short and simple, containing few items. This dearth of criteria shows a lack of consistency when compared to specific symptoms within a diagnosis. Given the influence of the DSM system of diagnosis (e.g., in reimbursement, research studies, treatment planning), the publication of emerging measures that fail to meet basic standards of testing and measurement is disconcerting. Perhaps the most basic critique of the system is that the measures publication in the DSM-5 lack alignment to the very diagnostic categories they are supposed to evaluate. The presence of these emerging measures in the DSM-5 presents an incomplete system that fails to comprehensively augment the categorical system of diagnosis that the American Psychiatric Association currently endorses. In this case, publication of dimensional measures may have been premature. Professional counselors should be cautious in the adaptation of these emerging measures at this time. Full article and references: Schmit, E. L., & Balkin, R. S. (2014). Evaluating emerging measures in the DSM-5 for counseling practice. The Professional Counselor , 4 , 216–231. doi:10.15241/els.4.3.216 Cross-Cutting Symptom Measures DSM-5 Diagnostic Criteria The Professional Counselor DIGEST Volume 4, Issue 3 http://tpcjournal.nbcc.org © 2014 NBCC, Inc. and Affiliates