Joshua C Hunt1, Samantha A Chesney2, Terrence D Jorgensen3, Nicholas R Schumann4, Terri A deRoon-Cassini4. 1. Department of Surgery, Division of Trauma and Critical Care. 2. Department of Psychology, Marquette University. 3. Department of Child Development and Education Division of Methods and Statistics, University of Amsterdam. 4. Department of Surgery, Division of Trauma and Critical Care, Medical College of Wisconsin.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The latent factor structure of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) remains a source of considerable variability. The current study compared several a priori factor structures, as well as a novel 2-factor structure of posttraumatic psychological distress as measured by the Clinician Administered PTSD scale for the DSM-5 (CAPS-5). In addition, variability in diagnostic rates according to the divergent DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria were explored. METHOD: The setting for this study was a Level 1 trauma center in a U.S. metropolitan city. Data were pooled from 2 studies (N = 309) and participants were administered the CAPS-5 at 1 (n = 139) or 6 months postinjury (n = 170). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to compare several factor models, and prevalence rates based on DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria were compared via z tests and kappa. RESULTS: CFAs of 5 factor structures indicated good fit for all models. A novel 2-factor model based on competing models of PTSD symptoms and modification indices was then tested. The 2-factor model of the CAPS-5 performed as well or better on most indices compared to a 7-factor hybrid. Comparisons of PTSD prevalence rates found no significant differences, but agreement was variable. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the CAPS-5 can be seen as measuring 2 distinct phenomena: posttraumatic stress disorder and general posttraumatic dysphoria. This is an important contribution to the current debate on which latent factors constitute PTSD and may reduce discordance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).
OBJECTIVE: The latent factor structure of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) remains a source of considerable variability. The current study compared several a priori factor structures, as well as a novel 2-factor structure of posttraumatic psychological distress as measured by the Clinician Administered PTSD scale for the DSM-5 (CAPS-5). In addition, variability in diagnostic rates according to the divergent DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria were explored. METHOD: The setting for this study was a Level 1 trauma center in a U.S. metropolitan city. Data were pooled from 2 studies (N = 309) and participants were administered the CAPS-5 at 1 (n = 139) or 6 months postinjury (n = 170). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to compare several factor models, and prevalence rates based on DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria were compared via z tests and kappa. RESULTS: CFAs of 5 factor structures indicated good fit for all models. A novel 2-factor model based on competing models of PTSD symptoms and modification indices was then tested. The 2-factor model of the CAPS-5 performed as well or better on most indices compared to a 7-factor hybrid. Comparisons of PTSD prevalence rates found no significant differences, but agreement was variable. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the CAPS-5 can be seen as measuring 2 distinct phenomena: posttraumatic stress disorder and general posttraumatic dysphoria. This is an important contribution to the current debate on which latent factors constitute PTSD and may reduce discordance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Jon D Elhai; Tracey L Biehn; Cherie Armour; Jessica J Klopper; B Christopher Frueh; Patrick A Palmieri Journal: J Anxiety Disord Date: 2010-10-30
Authors: Andreas Maercker; Chris R Brewin; Richard A Bryant; Marylene Cloitre; Mark van Ommeren; Lynne M Jones; Asma Humayan; Ashraf Kagee; Augusto E Llosa; Cécile Rousseau; Daya J Somasundaram; Renato Souza; Yuriko Suzuki; Inka Weissbecker; Simon C Wessely; Michael B First; Geoffrey M Reed Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: C Benjet; E Bromet; E G Karam; R C Kessler; K A McLaughlin; A M Ruscio; V Shahly; D J Stein; M Petukhova; E Hill; J Alonso; L Atwoli; B Bunting; R Bruffaerts; J M Caldas-de-Almeida; G de Girolamo; S Florescu; O Gureje; Y Huang; J P Lepine; N Kawakami; Viviane Kovess-Masfety; M E Medina-Mora; F Navarro-Mateu; M Piazza; J Posada-Villa; K M Scott; A Shalev; T Slade; M ten Have; Y Torres; M C Viana; Z Zarkov; K C Koenen Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: Robert H Pietrzak; Jack Tsai; Cherie Armour; Natalie Mota; Ilan Harpaz-Rotem; Steven M Southwick Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2014-12-13 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Andrew H Kemp; Kim Felmingham; Pritha Das; Gerard Hughes; Anthony S Peduto; Richard A Bryant; Leanne M Williams Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2007-06-14 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Stephanie Grace Prost; Cynthia Golembeski; Vyjeyanthi S Periyakoil; Jalayne Arias; Andrea K Knittel; Jessica Ballin; Heather D Oliver; Nguyen-Toan Tran Journal: Int J Prison Health Date: 2022-04-05
Authors: Manon A Boeschoten; Niels Van der Aa; Anne Bakker; F Jackie June Ter Heide; Marthe C Hoofwijk; Ruud A Jongedijk; Agnes Van Minnen; Bernet M Elzinga; Miranda Olff Journal: Eur J Psychotraumatol Date: 2018-11-22
Authors: Antje Krüger-Gottschalk; Thomas Ehring; Christine Knaevelsrud; Anne Dyer; Ingo Schäfer; Julia Schellong; Heinrich Rau; Kai Köhler Journal: Eur J Psychotraumatol Date: 2022-01-19