Wilshire, Ward, and Clark (this issue, p. ♦♦♦) critiqued the classification of psychopathology in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, offering as an alternative a “Cambridge model” that focuses on symptoms rather than syndromes. They compared their model with additional alternatives, such as the Research Domain Criteria, the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology, and network analysis. In this commentary, I offer further comparisons, considering as well the five-factor model alternative to the DSM syndromal classification of personality disorder.

中文翻译：

---

心理病理学的替代模型：《精神疾病诊断和统计手册》，《心理病理学的分类法》，研究领域标准，网络分析，剑桥模型和五因素模型

Wilshire，Ward和Clark（本期，第♦♦♦页）在《精神障碍诊断和统计手册》中对心理病理学的分类提出了批评，并提供了一种“剑桥模型”作为替代方案，该模型侧重于症状而非综合症。他们将自己的模型与其他替代方案进行了比较，例如研究领域标准，心理病理学的分层分类法和网络分析。在这篇评论中，我提供了进一步的比较，同时考虑了人格障碍的DSM综合征分类的五因素模型替代方案。