Introducing a new specifier for functional somatic disorder: a psychodynamic approach to investigating emotional factors 2025 Maroti et al

Functional Somatic Disorders (FSD) present a significant challenge in the health-care system, characterized by persistent, distressing physical symptoms without sufficient medical or psychiatric explanations. This conceptual analysis explores the psychodynamic approach to understanding emotional factors influencing FSD, proposing a new psychological specifier. While current diagnostic frameworks, such as DSM-5’s Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSD) and ICD-11’s Bodily Distress Disorder (BDD), incorporate psychological components, they do not fully address emotional dynamics.

This paper advocates for integrating emotional factors into diagnostic criteria. The proposed specifier focuses on emotional factors such as unresolved grief, trauma, and unmet needs, which can exacerbate or cause somatic symptoms. Six signs indicative of emotional influence on somatic symptoms are discussed, emphasizing a collaborative investigative approach. Incorporating this specifier could enhance diagnostic accuracy, treatment planning, and patient outcomes by acknowledging the interplay between emotional and physical health.

Open access

 

I’m sure the authors took great care in discussing the proofs for this casual relationship..

 

It’s been said by thousands of low quality papers in the literature. So it must be true!
That’s how science works right, we just repeat things enough and they become real. (/s)

 

Disabling, actually. The 'distressing' framing is superfluous, and mostly fabricated by ideologues. The problem is that they are disabling, this is what needs to be solved, and this is not what they are working on, confused by their own jiggly keys.

Oh, I guess it's one of those days, uh? Yeah, so fortunate that someone thought of that. No one's ever thought of that before. Groundbreaking stuff, folks. Speaking of groundbreaking, today I discovered this thing I will call "the ground". No one's ever thought of it before, or considered why stuff doesn't just float away or keep falling down.

If I'm not mistaken, those are basically the bullshit models they made up to describe their weird emotional disorder stuff, but without saying so explicitly, as a concession to the fact that they don't have any basis, but everyone understands they mean just that.

So just like the "chemical imbalance" BS, tacked on psychosocial models because in most cases there is no basis to them so they added this fake pretend biology into the mix so they could call it biopsychosocial.

Anyway, keep plucking that chicken. The chicken has been thoroughly plucked multiple times, but it's still all feathery and stuff.

 

I hate that word "distressing". It conjures up all sorts of pictures of Victorian women fainting and crying, and to me it is demeaning. Physical symptoms lead to distress. It isn't distress that comes out of nowhere that leads to physical symptoms.