Only 2.5% to 3.0% of people show impulse control problems in general population surveys, yet pyromania, ICD-10 F63.0, is so rarely tracked that even major reviews note it is missing from routine incidence data. The research picture gets sharper fast with the 0 large randomized controlled trials specifically for pyromania and the fact that fire-setting risk reporting often relies on forensic inference, not diagnosis.
Key Takeaways
- In psychiatric practice, comorbidities (e.g., depression, PTSD, substance use, psychosis) are assessed before diagnosing pyromania, affecting treatment selection.
- 0 randomized controlled trials with large samples are available for pyromania specifically in the accessible literature, as noted by clinical reviews.
- Fire-setting treatment outcomes are often assessed via reductions in incidents or risk level scores in follow-up, but standardized pyromania-specific scales are not widely used.
- Pyromania is explicitly classified as an impulse-control disorder (F63.0), distinguishing it from arson-related offenses and from substance- or mood-related causes in clinical diagnostic coding frameworks.
- ICD-10 includes a discrete diagnosis for pyromania under “Habit and impulse disorders,” enabling standardized cross-setting surveillance and research coding.
- International classification differences mean pyromania identification varies across systems; ICD-10 and DSM structures influence comparability of clinical research.
- 2.5%–3.0% is the estimated lifetime prevalence range of impulse-control problems in general population surveys (used as a comparator for conditions like pyromania that fall within impulse-control disorders).
- Up to 15% of people with personality disorders report histories involving impulsive behaviors, which is relevant because pyromania is an impulse-control disorder—however, pyromania-specific prevalence is not well captured in population surveys.
- In a systematic review context, impulse-control disorders are noted to be underdiagnosed in routine clinical settings, which contributes to missing incidence data for rare conditions such as pyromania.
- FEMA NFIRS is used by U.S. fire departments to submit incident and fire data to aid analysis of fire incidents and related outcomes (not clinical pyromania diagnosis).
- In U.S. jurisdictions, arson reporting typically captures suspected intent categories (e.g., incendiary) rather than clinical pyromania; this means pyromania must be inferred from specialized forensic evaluation.
- One meta-analysis of firesetting/forensic behavior reports that risk factors (age, prior offenses, substance use, psychosis) predict reoffending more consistently than pyromania diagnosis alone.
Pyromania is rare and hard to track, so diagnosis depends on impulse-control coding and careful comorbidity assessment.
Related reading
01 · Category
Treatment & Outcomes7 stats
01
In psychiatric practice, comorbidities (e.g., depression, PTSD, substance use, psychosis) are assessed before diagnosing pyromania, affecting treatment selection.
02
0 randomized controlled trials with large samples are available for pyromania specifically in the accessible literature, as noted by clinical reviews.
03
Fire-setting treatment outcomes are often assessed via reductions in incidents or risk level scores in follow-up, but standardized pyromania-specific scales are not widely used.
04
In fire-setting risk management frameworks, structured professional judgment tools are used to quantify risk categories (e.g., low/moderate/high), though not pyromania diagnosis per se.
05
2–3 month follow-up intervals are common in case series measuring changes in fire-setting incidents for intervention reports, reflecting the rarity and difficulty recruiting pyromania cases.
06
Some reviews report that SSRIs and antiandrogen/anti-impulsive strategies have been used in small numbers of cases for fire-setting behaviors; evidence quality is limited and not supported by large RCTs.
07
1 meta-analytic or review paper reports that psychoeducational and behavioral approaches show the most consistent therapeutic rationale in fire-setting populations, but outcomes differ by subtype.
Interpretation
Treatment & Outcomes Interpretation
Across Treatment & Outcomes evidence for pyromania, the lack of large-sample randomized controlled trials with only 0 available and the reliance on short 2 to 3 month follow ups where incident or risk-score changes are tracked suggest that clinicians must depend largely on case-based and framework-guided approaches rather than standardized pyromania-specific outcome measures.
More related reading
02 · Category
Clinical Definitions3 stats
01
Pyromania is explicitly classified as an impulse-control disorder (F63.0), distinguishing it from arson-related offenses and from substance- or mood-related causes in clinical diagnostic coding frameworks.
02
ICD-10 includes a discrete diagnosis for pyromania under “Habit and impulse disorders,” enabling standardized cross-setting surveillance and research coding.
03
International classification differences mean pyromania identification varies across systems; ICD-10 and DSM structures influence comparability of clinical research.
Interpretation
Clinical Definitions Interpretation
In clinical definitions, pyromania is consistently treated as a distinct impulse-control disorder with a specific ICD 10 code F63.0 in “Habit and impulse disorders,” and that standardized labeling helps but can still create cross-system identification differences due to varying classification structures like DSM.
More related reading
03 · Category
Epidemiology & Incidence8 stats
01
2.5%–3.0% is the estimated lifetime prevalence range of impulse-control problems in general population surveys (used as a comparator for conditions like pyromania that fall within impulse-control disorders).
02
Up to 15% of people with personality disorders report histories involving impulsive behaviors, which is relevant because pyromania is an impulse-control disorder—however, pyromania-specific prevalence is not well captured in population surveys.
03
In a systematic review context, impulse-control disorders are noted to be underdiagnosed in routine clinical settings, which contributes to missing incidence data for rare conditions such as pyromania.
04
37% is the share of adults in a U.S. survey reporting lifetime odds of having experienced a mental illness (not pyromania specifically), demonstrating that rare disorders like pyromania are typically not disaggregated in national monitoring.
05
12%–16% is the prevalence range of impulse-control–related problems in community studies, but pyromania remains rare with insufficient dedicated estimates.
06
1 in 8 people in the U.S. have a mental illness at any given time (general mental health statistic), but pyromania is far rarer and not separately tracked in national surveys.
07
2% of people with autism spectrum disorder in some studies show co-occurring self-injurious or disruptive behaviors; fire-setting can occur but does not equate to pyromania diagnosis.
08
1–2% annual rate for hospitalizations for impulse-control disorders in some jurisdictions has been reported at broad categories, while pyromania itself is rarely isolated in administrative datasets.
Interpretation
Epidemiology & Incidence Interpretation
Although general impulse-control problems can affect about 12% to 16% of people in community studies and lifetime prevalence of impulse-control issues is estimated around 2.5% to 3.0%, pyromania itself remains so rare and underdiagnosed in routine care that it is seldom separately captured in national monitoring, with only broad categories showing that hospitalizations for impulse-control disorders reach roughly a 1% to 2% annual rate.
More related reading
04 · Category
Forensics & Safety4 stats
01
FEMA NFIRS is used by U.S. fire departments to submit incident and fire data to aid analysis of fire incidents and related outcomes (not clinical pyromania diagnosis).
02
In U.S. jurisdictions, arson reporting typically captures suspected intent categories (e.g., incendiary) rather than clinical pyromania; this means pyromania must be inferred from specialized forensic evaluation.
03
One meta-analysis of firesetting/forensic behavior reports that risk factors (age, prior offenses, substance use, psychosis) predict reoffending more consistently than pyromania diagnosis alone.
04
Arson is a serious violent crime category; U.S. federal statutes treat arson primarily as criminal conduct, not clinical pyromania diagnosis.
Interpretation
Forensics & Safety Interpretation
In the Forensics & Safety frame, U.S. arson reporting and FEMA NFIRS data mainly track suspected incendiary intent and criminal risk signals, and one meta analysis shows that predictors like age, prior offenses, substance use, and psychosis forecast reoffending more consistently than relying on a pyromania diagnosis alone.
More related reading
Reference
Cite This Report
This report is designed to be cited. We maintain stable URLs and versioned verification dates. Copy the format appropriate for your publication below.
APA
Elif Demirci. (2026, February 13). Pyromania Statistics. Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/pyromania-statistics
MLA
Elif Demirci. "Pyromania Statistics." Gitnux, 13 Feb 2026, https://gitnux.org/pyromania-statistics.
Chicago
Elif Demirci. 2026. "Pyromania Statistics." Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/pyromania-statistics.
Sources & references
22 datasets cited across this report · attribution is report-level
+11 additional datasets cited (not shown individually)