No brief commentary can do justice to the elegant historical and conceptual analysis provided by Clark, Cuthbert, Lewis-Fernández, Narrow, and Reed (2017; this issue) of the major approaches to the diagnosis of mental disorders. Scholars and clinicians interested in understanding the evolution of current diagnostic approaches and the challenges that need to be addressed as we attempt to move forward will find the report to be an invaluable resource. Here, I want only to highlight and comment on three issues related to the future of the diagnosis of mental disorders addressed by Clark et al.: the role of scientific evidence in revision of current diagnostic frameworks; how dimensional approaches might be incorporated into diagnostic schemas in productive ways; and the basis for differences among diagnostic classifications.

中文翻译：

---

迈向精神障碍诊断的未来

简短的评论无法对Clark，Cuthbert，Lewis-Fernández，Narrow和Reed（2017年;本期）提供的关于精神障碍诊断主要方法的优美历史和概念分析表示公正。有兴趣了解当前诊断方法的发展以及在我们尝试前进时需要解决的挑战的学者和临床医生会发现该报告是宝贵的资源。在这里，我只想强调和评论Clark等提出的与精神疾病诊断的未来有关的三个问题：科学证据在当前诊断框架的修订中的作用；尺寸方法如何以生产方式整合到诊断方案中；以及诊断分类之间差异的基础。