The core symptom of the disorder is that the sufferer holds an unshakable belief that another person is secretly in love with them. In some cases, the sufferer may believe several people at once are "secret admirers". The sufferer may also experience other types of delusions concurrently with erotomania, such as delusions of reference, wherein the perceived admirer secretly communicates his or her love by subtle methods such as body posture, arrangement of household objects, and other seemingly innocuous acts (or, if the person is a public figure, through clues in the media). Erotomanic delusions are typically found as the primary symptom of a delusional disorder or in the context of schizophrenia and may be treated with atypical antipsychotics.

Erotomania is a type of delusional disorder where the affected person believes that another person is in love with him or her. This belief is usually applied to someone with higher status or a famous person, but can also be applied to a complete stranger. Erotomanic delusions often occur in patients with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, but can also occur during a manic episode in the context of bipolar I disorder. During an erotomanic delusion, the patient believes that a secret admirer is declaring his or her affection for the patient, often by special glances, signals, telepathy, or messages through the media. Usually the patient then returns the perceived affection by means of letters, phone calls, gifts, and visits to the unwitting recipient. Even though these advances are unexpected and often unwanted, any denial of affection by the object of this delusional love is dismissed by the patient as a ploy to conceal the forbidden love from the rest of the world.

Erotomania is also called de Clérambault's syndrome, after French psychiatrist Gaëtan Gatian de Clérambault (1872–1934), who published a comprehensive review paper on the subject ("Les Psychoses Passionnelles") in 1921. Erotomania should not be confused with obsessive love or obsession with unrequited love, neither of which involves delusion.

About 92% of pregnancies in Europe with a diagnosis of Down syndrome are terminated. In the United States, termination rates are around 67%, but this rate varied from 61% to 93% among different populations evaluated. When nonpregnant people are asked if they would have a termination if their fetus tested positive, 23–33% said yes, when high-risk pregnant women were asked, 46–86% said yes, and when women who screened positive are asked, 89–97% say yes.

When screening tests predict a high risk of Down syndrome, a more invasive diagnostic test (amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling) is needed to confirm the diagnosis. If Down syndrome occurs in one in 500 pregnancies and the test used has a 5% false-positive rate, this means, of 26 women who test positive on screening, only one will have Down syndrome confirmed. If the screening test has a 2% false-positive rate, this means one of eleven who test positive on screening have a fetus with DS. Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling are more reliable tests, but they increase the risk of miscarriage between 0.5 and 1%. The risk of limb problems is increased in the offspring due to the procedure. The risk from the procedure is greater the earlier it is performed, thus amniocentesis is not recommended before 15 weeks gestational age and chorionic villus sampling before 10 weeks gestational age.

In medicine a broad definition of syndrome is used, which describes a collection of symptoms and findings without necessarily tying them to a single identifiable pathogenesis. The more specific definition employed in medical genetics describes a subset of all medical syndromes.

Diagnosis can be made by EEG. In case of epileptic spasms, EEG shows typical patterns.

According to the Williams Syndrome Association, diagnosis of Williams syndrome begins with recognition of physical symptoms and markers, which is followed by a confirmatory genetic test. The physical signs that often indicate a suspected case of Williams syndrome include puffiness around the eyes, a long philtrum, and a pattern in the iris. Physiological symptoms that often contribute to a Williams syndrome diagnosis are cardiovascular problems, particularly aortic or pulmonary stenosis, as well as feeding disturbance in infants. Developmental delays are often taken as an initial sign of the syndrome, as well.

If a physician suspects a case of Williams syndrome, the diagnosis is confirmed using one of two possible genetic tests: micro-array analysis or the fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) test. The FISH test examines chromosome #7 and probes for the existence of two copies of the elastin gene. Since 98-99% of individuals with Williams syndrome lack half of the 7q11.23 region of chromosome #7, where the elastin gene is located, the presence of only one copy of the gene is a strong sign of the syndrome. This confirmatory genetic test has been validated in epidemiological studies of the syndrome, and has been demonstrated to be a more effective method of identifying Williams syndrome than previous methods, which often relied on the presence of cardiovascular problems and facial features (which, while common, are not always present).

Some diagnostic studies suggest that reliance on facial features to identify Williams syndrome may cause a misdiagnosis of the condition. Among the more reliable features suggestive of Williams are congenital heart disease, periorbital fullness ("puffy" eyes), and the presence of a long smooth philtrum. Less reliable signs of the syndrome include anteverted nostrils, a wide mouth, and an elongated neck. Researchers indicate that even with significant clinical experience, it is difficult to reliably identify Williams syndrome based on facial features alone.

A syndrome is a set of medical signs and symptoms occurring together, constitutes a particular disease or disorder. The word derives from the Greek σύνδρομον, meaning "concurrence". In some instances, a syndrome is so closely linked with a pathogenesis or cause that the words "syndrome", "disease", and "disorder" end up being used interchangeably for them. This is especially true of inherited syndromes. For example, Down syndrome, Wolf–Hirschhorn syndrome, and Andersen syndrome are disorders with known pathogeneses, so each is more than just a set of signs and symptoms, despite the "syndrome" nomenclature. In other instances, a syndrome is not specific to only one disease. For example, toxic shock syndrome can be caused by various toxins; premotor syndrome can be caused by various brain lesions; and premenstrual syndrome is not a disease but simply a set of symptoms.

If an underlying genetic cause is suspected but not known, a condition may be referred to as a genetic association (often just "association" in context). By definition, an association indicates that the collection of signs and symptoms occurs in combination more frequently than would be likely by chance alone.

Syndromes are often named after the physician or group of physicians that discovered them or initially described the full clinical picture. Such eponymous syndrome names are examples of medical eponyms. Recently, there has been a shift towards naming conditions descriptively (by symptoms or underlying cause) rather than eponymously, but the eponymous syndrome names often persist in common usage.

Diagnosis of 48, XXXY is usually done by a standard karyotype. A karyotype is a chromosomal analysis in which a full set of chromosomes can be seen for an individual. The presence of the additional 2 X chromosomes on the karyotype are indicative of XXXY syndrome.

Another way to diagnosis 48, XXXY is by chromosomal microarray showing the presence of extra X chromosomes. Chromosomal microarray (CMA) is used to detect extra or missing chromosomal segments or whole chromosomes. CMA uses microchip-based testing to analyze many pieces of DNA. Males with 48, XXXY are diagnosed anywhere from before birth to adulthood as a result of the range in the severity of symptoms. The age range at diagnosis is likely due to the fact that XXXY is a rare syndrome, and does not cause as extreme phenotypes as other variants of Klinefelter syndrome (such as XXXXY).

Diagnostic testing could also be done via blood samples. Elevated levels of follicle stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, and low levels of testosterone can be indicative of this syndrome.

In general, children with a small isolated nevus and a normal physical exam do not need further testing; treatment may include potential surgical removal of the nevus. If syndrome issues are suspected, neurological, ocular, and skeletal exams are important. Laboratory investigations may include serum and urine calcium and phosphate, and possibly liver and renal function tests. The choice of imaging studies depends on the suspected abnormalities and might include skeletal survey, CT scan of the head, MRI, and/or EEG.

Depending on the systems involved, an individual with Schimmelpenning syndrome may need to see an interdisciplinary team of specialists: dermatologist, neurologist, ophthalmologist, orthopedic surgeon, oral surgeon, plastic surgeon, psychologist.

Anticholinergic drugs have been reported to be extremely effective in 40% of the patients with the Pisa syndrome. Patients with Pisa syndrome that is resistant to anticholinergic drugs is mostly resolved by the reduction of the administration of the antipsychotic drugs as previously mentioned. While the specific pathology underlying idiopathic Pisa syndrome is unknown, the administration of anticholinergic drugs has provided resolution in known cases.

Carrier testing for Roberts syndrome requires prior identification of the disease-causing mutation in the family. Carriers for the disorder are heterozygotes due to the autosomal recessive nature of the disease. Carriers are also not at risk for contracting Roberts syndrome themselves. A prenatal diagnosis of Roberts syndrome requires an ultrasound examination paired with cytogenetic testing or prior identification of the disease-causing ESCO2 mutations in the family.

Occasionally the syndrome is referred to as "idiopathic" West syndrome, when a cause cannot be determined. Important diagnostic criteria are:

- Regular development until the onset of the attacks or before the beginning of the therapy

- no pathological findings in neurological or neuroradiological studies

- no evidence of a trigger for the spasms

Those are becoming rare due to modern medicine.

In terms of the diagnosis of Romano–Ward syndrome the following is done to ascertain the condition(the "Schwartz Score" helps in so doing):

- Exercise test

- ECG

- Family history

There are two lines of treatment for Pisa syndrome. The first line entails discontinuation or reduction in dose of the antipsychotic drug(s). The second line of treatment is an anticholinergic medication. A pharmacological therapy for Pisa syndrome caused by prolonged use of antipsychotic drugs has not been established yet.

In terms of diagnosis for this condition, the following methods/tests are available:

- Endoscopic

- CT scan

- Serum endocrine autoantibody screen

- Histologic test

Screening generally only takes place among those displaying several of the symptoms of ABCD, but a study on a large group of institutionalized deaf people in Columbia revealed that 5.38% of them were Waardenburg patients. Because of its rarity, none of the patients were diagnosed with ABCD (Waardenburg Type IV). Nothing can be done to prevent the disease.

Genetic testing may be available for mutations in the FGDY1 gene. Genetic counseling is indicated for individuals or families who may carry this condition, as there are overlapping features with fetal alcohol syndrome.

Other examinations or tests can help with diagnosis. These can include:

detailed family history

- conducting a detailed physical examination to document morphological features

- testing for genetic defect in FGDY1

- x-rays can identify skeletal abnormalities

- echo cardiogram can screen for heart abnormalities

- CT scan of the brain for cystic development

- X-ray of the teeth

- Ultrasound of abdomen to identify undescended testis

It is suggested that the diagnostic criteria for Malpuech syndrome should include cleft lip and/or palate, typical associated facial features, and at least two of the following: urogenital anomalies, caudal appendage, and growth or developmental delay.

Due to the relatively high rate of hearing impairment found with the disorder, it too may be considered in the diagnosis. Another congenital disorder, Wolf-Hirschhorn (Pitt-Rogers-Danks) syndrome, shares Malpuech features in its diagnostic criteria. Because of this lacking differentiation, karyotyping (microscopic analysis of the chromosomes of an individual) can be employed to distinguish the two. Whereas deletions in the short arm of chromosome 4 would be revealed with Wolf-Hirschhorn, a karyotype without this aberration present would favor a Malpuech syndrome diagnosis. Also, the karyotype of an individual with Malpuech syndrome alone will be normal.

Diagnosis is usually based on clinical findings, although fetal chromosome testing will show trisomy 13. While many of the physical findings are similar to Edwards syndrome there are a few unique traits, such as polydactyly. However, unlike Edwards syndrome and Down syndrome, the quad screen does not provide a reliable means of screening for this disorder. This is due to the variability of the results seen in fetuses with Patau.

Diagnosis of Harlequin syndrome is made when the individual has consistent signs and symptoms of the condition, therefore, it is made by clinical observation. In addition, a neurologist or primary care physician may require an MRI test to rule out similar disorders such as Horner's syndrome, Adie's syndrome, and Ross' syndrome. In an MRI, a radiologist may observe areas near brain or spinal cord for lesions, or any damage to the nerve endings. It is also important that the clinician rules out traumatic causes by performing autonomic function tests. Such tests includes the following: tilt table test, orthostatic blood pressure measurement, head-up test, valsalva maneuver, thermoregulatory sweat test, tendon reflex test, and electrocardiography (ECG). CT scan of the heart and lungs may also be performed to rule out a structural underlying lesion. The medical history of the individual should be carefully noted.

There is considerable research into the causes, diagnosis and treatments for FGIDs. Diet, microbiome, genetics, neuromuscular function and immunological response all interact. Heightened mast cell activation has been proposed to be a common factor among FGIDs, contributing to visceral hypersensitivity as well as epithelial, neuromuscular, and motility dysfunction.

Many of the congenital malformations found with Malpuech syndrome can be corrected surgically. These include cleft lip and palate, omphalocele, urogenital and craniofacial abnormalities, skeletal deformities such as a caudal appendage or scoliosis, and hernias of the umbillicus. The primary area of concern for these procedures applied to a neonate with congenital disorders including Malpuech syndrome regards the logistics of anesthesia. Methods like tracheal intubation for management of the airway during general anesthesia can be hampered by the even smaller, or maldeveloped mouth of the infant. For regional anesthesia, methods like spinal blocking are more difficult where scoliosis is present. In a 2010 report by Kiernan et al., a four-year-old girl with Malpuech syndrome was being prepared for an unrelated tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. While undergoing intubation, insertion of a laryngoscope, needed to identify the airway for the placement of the endotracheal tube, was made troublesome by the presence of micrognathia attributed to the syndrome. After replacement with a laryngoscope of adjusted size, intubation proceeded normally. Successful general anesthesia followed.

A rare follow-up of a male with Malpuech syndrome was presented by Priolo et al. (2007). Born at term from an uneventful pregnancy and delivery, the infant underwent a surgical repair of a cleft lip and palate. No problems were reported with the procedure. A heart abnormality, atrial septal defect, was also apparent but required no intervention. At age three years, mental retardation, hyperactivity and obsessive compulsive disorder were diagnosed; hearing impairment was diagnosed at age six, managed with the use of hearing aids. Over the course of the decade that followed, a number of psychiatric evaluations were performed. At age 14, he exhibited a fear of physical contact; at age 15, he experienced a severe psychotic episode, characterized by agitation and a loss of sociosexual inhibition. This array of symptoms were treated pharmocologically (with prescription medications). He maintained a low level of mental deficiency by age 17, with moments of compulsive echolalia.

In terms of diagnosing Bannayan–Riley–Ruvalcaba syndrome there is no current method outside the physical characteristics that may be present as signs/symptoms. There are, however, multiple molecular genetics tests (and cytogenetic test) to determine Bannayan–Riley–Ruvalcaba syndrome.

The diagnosis of this syndrome can be made on clinical examination and perinatal autopsy.

Koenig and Spranger (1986) noted that eye lesions are apparently nonobligatory components of the syndrome. The diagnosis of Fraser syndrome should be entertained in patients with a combination of acrofacial and urogenital malformations with or without cryptophthalmos. Thomas et al. (1986) also emphasized the occurrence of the cryptophthalmos syndrome without cryptophthalmos and proposed diagnostic criteria for Fraser syndrome. Major criteria consisted of cryptophthalmos, syndactyly, abnormal genitalia, and positive family history. Minor criteria were congenital malformation of the nose, ears, or larynx, cleft lip and/or palate, skeletal defects, umbilical hernia, renal agenesis, and mental retardation. Diagnosis was based on the presence of at least 2 major and 1 minor criteria, or 1 major and 4 minor criteria.

Boyd et al. (1988) suggested that prenatal diagnosis by ultrasound examination of eyes, digits, and kidneys should detect the severe form of the syndrome. Serville et al. (1989) demonstrated the feasibility of ultrasonographic diagnosis of the Fraser syndrome at 18 weeks' gestation. They suggested that the diagnosis could be made if 2 of the following signs are present: obstructive uropathy, microphthalmia, syndactyly, and oligohydramnios. Schauer et al. (1990) made the diagnosis at 18.5 weeks' gestation on the basis of sonography. Both the female fetus and the phenotypically normal father had a chromosome anomaly: inv(9)(p11q21). An earlier born infant had Fraser syndrome and the same chromosome 9 inversion.

Van Haelst et al. (2007) provided a revision of the diagnostic criteria for Fraser syndrome according to Thomas et al. (1986) through the addition of airway tract and urinary tract anomalies to the major criteria and removal of mental retardation and clefting as criteria. Major criteria included syndactyly, cryptophthalmos spectrum, urinary tract abnormalities, ambiguous genitalia, laryngeal and tracheal anomalies, and positive family history. Minor criteria included anorectal defects, dysplastic ears, skull ossification defects, umbilical abnormalities, and nasal anomalies. Cleft lip and/or palate, cardiac malformations, musculoskeletal anomalies, and mental retardation were considered uncommon. Van Haelst et al. (2007) suggested that the diagnosis of Fraser syndrome can be made if either 3 major criteria, or 2 major and 2 minor criteria, or 1 major and 3 minor criteria are present in a patient.