OBJECTIVE: To examine the implications of use of differential thresholds for studying medical Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). METHODS: Self-report data from 6,542 young adult survivors of childhood cancer and 374 of their siblings were used to create clearly differentially defined groups to compare prevalence, correlations and predictors of posttraumatic stress. RESULTS: Prevalence of posttraumatic stress in survivors compared to siblings differed by definition used, ranging from an odds ratio of 4.21 (95% CI 2.11-8.38) when posttraumatic stress was defined as meeting full symptoms plus functional impairment to 1.42 (95% CI 0.79-2.56) for partial symptoms with functional impairment. Re-experiencing symptoms did not substantially contribute to the ability to identify functional impairment and emotional distress. Although most of the variables associated with posttraumatic stress symptoms and impairment were consistent across definitions of PTSD, marital status and employment demonstrated nonproportional relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Choice of the definition used in studying posttraumatic stress after serious illness alters not only epidemiological findings, but also associations with correlates and predictors. This is important in the current debate about the criteria for PTSD in the upcoming DSMV. Further study is needed to determine if these findings are applicable to people exposed to other types of traumatic events.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the implications of use of differential thresholds for studying medical Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). METHODS: Self-report data from 6,542 young adult survivors of childhood cancer and 374 of their siblings were used to create clearly differentially defined groups to compare prevalence, correlations and predictors of posttraumatic stress. RESULTS: Prevalence of posttraumatic stress in survivors compared to siblings differed by definition used, ranging from an odds ratio of 4.21 (95% CI 2.11-8.38) when posttraumatic stress was defined as meeting full symptoms plus functional impairment to 1.42 (95% CI 0.79-2.56) for partial symptoms with functional impairment. Re-experiencing symptoms did not substantially contribute to the ability to identify functional impairment and emotional distress. Although most of the variables associated with posttraumatic stress symptoms and impairment were consistent across definitions of PTSD, marital status and employment demonstrated nonproportional relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Choice of the definition used in studying posttraumatic stress after serious illness alters not only epidemiological findings, but also associations with correlates and predictors. This is important in the current debate about the criteria for PTSD in the upcoming DSMV. Further study is needed to determine if these findings are applicable to people exposed to other types of traumatic events.
Authors: C L Alter; D Pelcovitz; A Axelrod; B Goldenberg; H Harris; B Meyers; B Grobois; F Mandel; A Septimus; S Kaplan Journal: Psychosomatics Date: 1996 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.386
Authors: W L Hobbie; M Stuber; K Meeske; K Wissler; M T Rourke; K Ruccione; A Hinkle; A E Kazak Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-12-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Marylene Cloitre; Bradley C Stolbach; Judith L Herman; Bessel van der Kolk; Robert Pynoos; Jing Wang; Eva Petkova Journal: J Trauma Stress Date: 2009-09-30
Authors: Leslie L Robison; Ann C Mertens; John D Boice; Norman E Breslow; Sarah S Donaldson; Daniel M Green; Frederic P Li; Anna T Meadows; John J Mulvihill; Joseph P Neglia; Mark E Nesbit; Roger J Packer; John D Potter; Charles A Sklar; Malcolm A Smith; Marilyn Stovall; Louise C Strong; Yutaka Yasui; Lonnie K Zeltzer Journal: Med Pediatr Oncol Date: 2002-04
Authors: Tara M Brinkman; E Anne Lown; Chenghong Li; Ingrid Tonning Olsson; Jordan Gilleland Marchak; Margaret L Stuber; Stefanie Vuotto; Deokumar Srivastava; Paul C Nathan; Wendy M Leisenring; Gregory T Armstrong; Leslie L Robison; Kevin R Krull Journal: Addiction Date: 2018-10-19 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Jennifer S Ford; Toana Kawashima; John Whitton; Wendy Leisenring; Caroline Laverdière; Marilyn Stovall; Lonnie Zeltzer; Leslie L Robison; Charles A Sklar Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-08-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Wei Liu; Yin Ting Cheung; Tara M Brinkman; Pia Banerjee; Deokumar Srivastava; Vikki G Nolan; Hongmei Zhang; James G Gurney; Ching-Hon Pui; Leslie L Robison; Melissa M Hudson; Kevin R Krull Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2018-03-30 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Conor M Jones; Justin N Baker; Rachel M Keesey; Ruth J Eliason; Jennifer Q Lanctot; Jennifer L Clegg; Belinda N Mandrell; Kirsten K Ness; Kevin R Krull; Deokumar Srivastava; Christopher B Forrest; Melissa M Hudson; Leslie L Robison; I-Chan Huang Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2018-04-18 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Stefanie C Vuotto; Kevin R Krull; Chenghong Li; Kevin C Oeffinger; Daniel M Green; Sunita K Patel; Deokumar Srivastava; Marilyn Stovall; Kirsten K Ness; Gregory T Armstrong; Leslie L Robison; Tara M Brinkman Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-10-20 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Lexa K Murphy; Erin M Rodriguez; Laura Schwartz; Heather Bemis; Leandra Desjardins; Cynthia A Gerhardt; Kathryn Vannatta; Megan Saylor; Bruce E Compas Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2015-07-27 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: E Anne Lown; Farya Phillips; Lisa A Schwartz; Abby R Rosenberg; Barbara Jones Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Jennifer Allen; Victoria W Willard; James L Klosky; Chenghong Li; D Kumar Srivastava; Leslie L Robison; Melissa M Hudson; Sean Phipps Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2017-11-03 Impact factor: 4.442