Search

The dissociative subtype of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD-DS) denotes a severe type of PTSD associated with complex trauma exposure and psychiatric comorbidity. Refugees may be at heightened risk of developing PTSD-DS, but research is lacking. This cross-sectional study aimed to examine PTSD-DS and its demographic, trauma-related, and clinical correlates among a convenience sample of refugee patients over 18 years old who were diagnosed with PTSD according to DSM-5. PTSD-DS (Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5), trauma exposure (Life Events Checklist for DSM-5) and general psychopathology (Brief Symptom Inventory) were assessed at intake. T-tests, chi-square tests, and logistical regression analysis were conducted. The final sample consisted of 552 participants (177 (32.1%) women; 375 (67.9%) men; average age 40.0 years (SD = 11.2)) who originated from 63 countries. Of those, 158 (28.6%) met criteria for PTSD-DS. Participants with PTSD-DS scored significantly higher on PTSD symptom severity (t(550)=-5.270, p <.001), number of traumatic event types (t(456)=-3.499, p <.001), and exposure to sexual assault (χ(1) = 6.471, p =.01) than those without PTSD-DS. The odds of having PTSD-DS increased by 14.1% with exposure to each additional traumatic event type (OR = 1.141, CI 0.033–1.260). In conclusion, around 29% of adult treatment-seeking refugees with PTSD met the criteria for PTSD-DS. Those exposed to multiple traumatic event types including sexual assault, regardless of sex, were especially at risk. Having PTSD-DS was associated with more severe PTSD. Prioritizing trauma-focused treatment for those with PTSD-DS is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We used item response theory (IRT) analysis to examine Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) item performance using data from three large samples of veterans (total N = 808) using both binary and ordinal rating methods. Relative to binary ratings, ordinal ratings provided good coverage from well below to well above average within each symptom cluster. However, coverage varied by cluster, and item difficulties were unevenly distributed within each cluster, with numerous instances of redundancy. For both binary and ordinal scores, flashbacks, dissociative amnesia, and self-destructive behavior items showed a pattern of high difficulty but relatively poor discrimination. Results indicate that CAPS-5 ordinal ratings provide good severity coverage and that most items accurately differentiated between participants by severity. Observed uneven distribution and redundancy in item difficulty suggest there is opportunity to create an abbreviated version of the CAPS-5 for determining PTSD symptom severity, but not DSM-5 PTSD diagnosis, without sacrificing precision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The CAPS-5 is a reliable instrument for assessing PTSD symptoms, demonstrating strong consistency, validity, and reliability after a traumatic event. However, further research is warranted to explore the divergent validity of the CAPS-5 and its adaptation to diverse cultural contexts. Objective: In this meta-analysis, we endeavoured to comprehensively evaluate the reliability generalization of the CAPS-5 across diverse populations and clinical contexts. Methods: A reliability generalization meta-analysis on the psychometric properties of CAPS-5 was conducted, encompassing 15 studies. The original versions' psychometric properties were systematically retrieved from databases including PubMed, PsychNet, Medline, CHAHL, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, with a focus on studies published between 2013 and 2023. Two independent investigators evaluated study quality using QUADAS-2 and COSMIN RB, pre-registering the protocol in the Prospero database for transparency and minimizing bias risk. Results: Meta-analysis reveals CAPS-5 global reliability (α = 0.92, 95% CI [0.90, 0.94]), z = 99.44, p < 0.05 across 15 studies, supporting consistent internal consistency. Subscale analysis shows variability in Reexperiencing (α = 0.82), Avoidance (α = 0.68), Cognition and Mood (α = 0.82), and Hyperarousal (α = 0.74), with an overall estimate of 0.77 (95% CI [0.70;0.83]). Language-dependent analysis highlights reliability variations (α range: 0.83 to 0.92) across Brazilian- Portuguese, Dutch, English, French, German, Korean, and Portuguese. Test--retest reliability demonstrates stability (r = 0.82, 95% CI [0.79; 0.85]), with overall convergent validity (r = 0.59, 95% CI [0.50;0.68]). Conclusion: The meta-analysis affirms CAPS-5's robust global and subscale reliability across studies and languages, with stable test--retest results. Moderator analysis finds no significant impact, yet substantial residual heterogeneity remains unexplained. Our findings contribute intricate insights into the psychometric properties of this instrument, offering a more complete understanding of its utility in PTSD assessment. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_ record.php?ID=CRD42023483748. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As reported in this journal, Resick and colleagues (2023) investigated discrepancies between scores from two widely used PTSD measures: the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5; Weathers et al., 2013) and the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5; Weathers et al., 2013), a clinician-rated structured interview and a self-rated questionnaire, respectively. Using data from four clinical trials of active-duty military personnel and veterans, the authors replicated the common finding that PCL-5 scores are higher than CAPS-5 scores. They then examined item response distributions, finding that ratings on the PCL-5 were more evenly distributed across all five options whereas specific CAPS-5 scores were used relatively infrequently. Concluding that this finding indicates a problem that should be addressed, they offered suggestions for revising anchors and items to improve correspondence between the two measures.Objective: The results are informative and the nature and size of the sample are well-suited to this important research question. However, we have a number of concerns and comments about this paper.Conclusion: In our view, the authors mischaracterized the CAPS-5 and PCL-5 in several important ways, resulting in some erroneous conclusions about their findings and the expected nature of the relationship between the CAPS-5 and PCL-5. Given that these issues are vital to the field of traumatic stress, we felt compelled to address them and provide an alternative perspective.

BackgroundThe CAPS-5 is a reliable instrument for assessing PTSD symptoms, demonstrating strong consistency, validity, and reliability after a traumatic event. However, further research is warranted to explore the divergent validity of the CAPS-5 and its adaptation to diverse cultural contexts.ObjectiveIn this meta-analysis, we endeavoured to comprehensively evaluate the reliability generalization of the CAPS-5 across diverse populations and clinical contexts.MethodsA reliability generalization meta-analysis on the psychometric properties of CAPS-5 was conducted, encompassing 15 studies. The original versions’ psychometric properties were systematically retrieved from databases including PubMed, PsychNet, Medline, CHAHL, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, with a focus on studies published between 2013 and 2023. Two independent investigators evaluated study quality using QUADAS-2 and COSMIN RB, pre-registering the protocol in the Prospero database for transparency and minimizing bias risk.ResultsMeta-analysis reveals CAPS-5 global reliability (α = 0.92, 95% CI [0.90, 0.94]), z = 99.44, p

Abstract Background Stroke is a devastating disease and can be sufficiently traumatic to induce post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Post-stroke PTSD is attracting increasing attention, but there was no study assessing the psychometric properties of the PCL-5 in stroke populations. Our study was conducted to examine the psychometric properties of the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) in Chinese stroke patients. Methods This was a cross-sectional observational study conducted at our hospital. Three hundred and forty-eight Chinese stroke patients came to our hospital for outpatient service were recruited. They were instructed to complete the PCL-5 scales and were interviewed for PTSD diagnosis with the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5). The cutoff scores, reliability and validity of the PCL-5 were analyzed. Results PCL-5 scores in our sample were positively skewed, suggesting low levels of PTSD symptoms. The reliability of PCL-5 was good. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses indicated acceptable construct validity, and confirmed the multi-dimensionality of the PCL-5. By CFA analysis, the seven-factor hybrid model demonstrated the best model fit. The PCL-5 also showed good convergent validity and discriminant validity. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses revealed a PCL-5 score of 37 achieved optimal sensitivity and specificity for detecting PTSD. Conclusions Our findings supported the use of PCL-5 as a psychometrically adequate measure of post-stroke PTSD in the Chinese patients.

Background: Stroke is a devastating disease and can be sufficiently traumatic to induce post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Post-stroke PTSD is attracting increasing attention, but there was no study assessing the psychometric properties of the PCL-5 in stroke populations. Our study was conducted to examine the psychometric properties of the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) in Chinese stroke patients. Methods: This was a cross-sectional observational study conducted at our hospital. Three hundred and forty-eight Chinese stroke patients came to our hospital for outpatient service were recruited. They were instructed to complete the PCL-5 scales and were interviewed for PTSD diagnosis with the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5). The cutoff scores, reliability and validity of the PCL-5 were analyzed. Results: PCL-5 scores in our sample were positively skewed, suggesting low levels of PTSD symptoms. The reliability of PCL-5 was good. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses indicated acceptable construct validity, and confirmed the multi-dimensionality of the PCL-5. By CFA analysis, the seven-factor hybrid model demonstrated the best model fit. The PCL-5 also showed good convergent validity and discriminant validity. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses revealed a PCL-5 score of 37 achieved optimal sensitivity and specificity for detecting PTSD. Conclusions: Our findings supported the use of PCL-5 as a psychometrically adequate measure of post-stroke PTSD in the Chinese patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Psychological fragility caused to human life has been the largest aftermath of the pandemic posing a raised public health concern globally. This psychological impact is identified as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) which was the most commonly diagnosed psychological disorder during this pandemic. These cases, if left untreated and unidentified may take a devastating transformation into psychotic disorders and cause gross damage to the individual and the community by disrupting human relations. Aims: Keeping in view the beneficial role of homoeopathy in dealing with psychological disorders based on its philosophy and previous studies, a clinical case series of 10 PTSD cases successfully treated with homoeopathy during this pandemic is presented here. Methods: 10 cases of PTSD consulted during the first wave of the pandemic diagnosed based on the clinical picture analogous to PTSD cluster symptomatology from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 (DSM-5) and objectively through Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) were treated with homoeopathic intervention. Homoeopathic medicine was prescribed based on the totality of each case through repertorization and in consultation with the sourcebooks of Homoeopathic Materia Medica (HMM). The cases were followed monthly for clinical improvement and every three months using the CAPS-5 score. The outcome was assessed after six months clinically and objectively through the CAPS-5 score. At the end of one year, further, to assess the causal attribution of clinical outcomes to homoeopathic intervention, a validated MONARCH (Modified Naranjo Criteria for Homoeopathy) tool was utilized. Results: The 10 diagnosed PTSD cases showed marked improvement assessed after one year of homoeopathic treatment. Significant improvement was found in the clinical picture affirmed through the CAPS-5 score and MONARCH tool. Conclusion: Homoeopathic medicines showed a significantly beneficial role in the management of PTSD during the pandemic in the presented 10 cases. Further validation through well-designed clinical trials is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Many studies have investigated the latent structure of the DSM-5 criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, most research on this topic was based on self-report data. We aimed to investigate the latent structure of PTSD based on a clinical interview, the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS-5). Method A clinical sample of 345 participants took part in this multi-centre study. Participants were assessed with the CAPS-5 and the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL-5). We evaluated eight competing models of DSM-5 PTSD symptoms and three competing models of ICD-11 PTSD symptoms. Results The internal consistency of the CAPS-5 was replicated. In CFAs, the Anhedonia model emerged as the best fitting model within all tested DSM-5 models. However, when compared with the Anhedonia model, the non-nested ICD-11 model as a less complex three-factor solution showed better model fit indices. Discussion We discuss the findings in the context of earlier empirical findings as well as theoretical models of PTSD.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5) versions of the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS-5) and PTSD Checklist (PCL-5) are widely used PTSD measures. Researchers and clinicians routinely use both measures in tandem to quantify symptom change, despite substantive instrumentation differences beyond administration modality, and absent a theoretical rationale or differential hypotheses for the two measures. The degree to which these measures provide comparable estimates of symptom change is unknown. This study examined concordance in change between CAPS-5 and PCL-5 scores over time. Participants were male veterans (N = 198) randomly assigned to one of two group PTSD treatments. We administered both the CAPS-5 and PCL-5 at baseline, midtreatment, immediately posttreatment, and 3-, 6-, and 12-month posttreatment. Results indicated that CAPS-5 and PCL-5 scores changed over time in a similar manner, as evidenced by generally parallel repeated-measures effect sizes, highly correlated slopes of change (r =.878), and similar associations with improvements in measures of depression and psychosocial functioning. However, the two measures did not produce identical estimates of symptom change. Estimates of symptom improvement were somewhat less concordant at posttreatment follow-up assessments; by the 12-month posttreatment assessment, changes in CAPS-5 scores from baseline indicated somewhat greater symptom improvement than changes in PCL-5 scores (CAPS-5 ESsg = −0.67, PCL-5 ESsg = −0.53). Collectively, results indicate that CAPS-5 and PCL-5 scores produce similar but not identical estimates of PTSD symptom change. Thus, although PCL-5 scores closely approximate symptom change estimated by CAPS-5 scores, the two measures are not interchangeable. Public Significance Statement: We found that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5) versions of the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS-5) and PTSD Checklist (PCL-5)—a widely used PTSD interview and questionnaire, respectively—produce similar but not identical estimates of PTSD symptom change. Thus, although PCL-5 scores closely approximate symptom change estimated by CAPS-5 scores, the two measures are not interchangeable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) is a structured interview that assesses the frequency and severity of each symptom of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in relation to a single traumatic stressor over a 1-month period, allowing the trained interviewer to infer a current or lifetime diagnosis congruent with the 5th Edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the original English language CAPS-5 translated to French. Participants (N = 168) were recruited in clinical settings of France, Lebanon, and Canada. The psychometric properties of the measure were found to be excellent, as good-to-strong interitem consistency was found (α =.90; ITC =.52; ICC =.30), while also finding strong convergent validity between the CAPS-5 total score and the severity score of a self-report PTSD measure (r =.82): the PCL-5. The test–retest reliability was excellent, with Cohen's κ = 1.00 and the intraclass coefficient (ICC) =.95. However, no latent factor structure model was deemed a strong fit to the data. Overall, the reliability and validity of the French CAPS-5 and are consistent with those of the original CAPS-5. Public Significance Statement: This study suggests that the French version of the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5), a structured diagnostic interview, can be used in clinical and research contexts, providing a reliable and valid severity score/diagnosis of Posttraumatic stress disorder congruent with the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of European Journal of Psychotraumatology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Labor and delivery can entail complications and severe maternal morbidities that threaten a woman's life or cause her to believe that her life is in danger. Women with these experiences are at risk for developing posttraumatic stress disorder. Postpartum posttraumatic stress disorder, or childbirth-related posttraumatic stress disorder, can become an enduring and debilitating condition. At present, validated tools for a rapid and efficient screen for childbirth-related posttraumatic stress disorder are lacking. We examined the diagnostic validity of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, for detecting posttraumatic stress disorder among women who have had a traumatic childbirth. This Checklist assesses the 20 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms and is a commonly used patient-administrated screening instrument. Its diagnostic accuracy for detecting childbirth-related posttraumatic stress disorder is unknown. The sample included 59 patients who reported a traumatic childbirth experience determined in accordance with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, posttraumatic stress disorder criterion A for exposure involving a threat or potential threat to the life of the mother or infant, experienced or perceived, or physical injury. The majority (66%) of the participants were less than 1 year postpartum (for full sample: median, 4.67 months; mean, 1.5 years) and were recruited via the Mass General Brigham's online platform, during the postpartum unit hospitalization or after discharge. Patients were instructed to complete the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, concerning posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms related to childbirth. Other comorbid conditions (ie, depression and anxiety) were also assessed. They also underwent a clinician interview for posttraumatic stress disorder using the gold-standard Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. A second administration of the Checklist was performed in a subgroup (n=43), altogether allowing an assessment of internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and convergent and diagnostic validity of the Checklist. The diagnostic accuracy of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, in reference to the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, was determined using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; an optimal cutoff score was identified using the Youden's J index. One-third of the sample (35.59%) met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, criteria for a posttraumatic stress disorder diagnosis stemming from childbirth. The Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, symptom severity score was strongly correlated with the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, total score (ρ=0.82; P <.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.93 (95% confidence interval, 0.87–0.99), indicating excellent diagnostic performance of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. A cutoff value of 28 optimized the sensitivity (0.81) and specificity (0.90) and correctly diagnosed 86% of women. A higher value (32) identified individuals with more severe posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms (specificity, 0.95), but with lower sensitivity (0.62). Checklist scores were also stable over time (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.73), indicating good test-retest reliability. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, scores were moderately correlated with the depression and anxiety symptom scores (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale: ρ=0.58; P <.001 and the Brief Symptom Inventory, anxiety subscale: ρ=0.51; P <.001). This study demonstrates the validity of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, as a screening tool for posttraumatic stress disorder among women who had a traumatic childbirth experience. The instrument may facilitate screening for childbirth-related posttraumatic stress disorder on a large scale and help identify women who might benefit from further diagnostics and services. Replication of the findings in larger, postpartum samples is needed. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study was aimed to assess the test-retest reliability of the Urdu translated version of CAPS-5 using the data of 140 survivors who experienced life threatening trauma in the previous month. Material and Methods: The assessments were carried out at two different times, initial assessment (Time 1) was performed 01 month after trauma and the second assessment (Time 2) was done 15 days after initial administration. The data was collected from a public hospital, Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) in the month of December 2018. Result: Cross language and test re-test reliability were assessed, high stability in correlation and coefficient between two scores were seen in two different versions (English and Urdu) over in two different times. Conclusion: Alpha reliability of 20 items of CAPS-5 .94- .92, and .93 to .62 for each symptom indicate satisfactory of Urdu version. However, the internal consistency is little higher than original English version .88 and test re-test reliability .83. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013) includes Other- and Unspecified- Trauma and Stressor-Related Disorders to capture subthreshold Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms. However, the DSM-5 does not specify the number or type of symptoms needed to assign them. The purpose of the current study was to extend our understanding of subthreshold PTSD by comparing four commonly used definitions adapted to the DSM-5 PTSD criteria in an outpatient treatment-seeking sample.Methods: Veterans (N = 193) presenting to PTSD clinics were assessed using the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5). Participants reported a criterion A traumatic event, but did not meet criteria for threshold-PTSD. We hypothesized that the number of veterans captured would be highest when fewer specific criterion sets were required by the subthreshold definition.Results: Our hypothesis was upheld in that the more criteria required by the subthreshold PTSD definition, the lower the number of veterans counted within the group.Limitations: The study consisted primarily of trauma treatment-seeking male veterans, with chronic PTSD symptoms. In addition, the sample size was small and was collected as part of routine clinical care.Conclusions: These results support previous contentions around careful decision making when defining what constitutes subthreshold PTSD in research and clinical work. It also points to the need for continued research to better understand the diagnostic and treatment implications of subthreshold PTSD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2013, the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale, the golden standard to assess PTSD, was adapted to the DSM-5 (CAPS-5). Objective: This project aimed to develop a clinically relevant Dutch translation of the CAPS-5 and to investigate its psychometric properties. Method: We conducted a stepped translation including Delphi rounds with a crowd of 44 Dutch psychotrauma experts and five senior psychotrauma experts. Using partial crowd-translations, two professional translations and the official Dutch translation of the DSM-5, each senior expert aggregated one independent translation. Consensus was reached plenary. After back-translation, comparison with the original CAPS-5 and field testing, a last round with the senior experts resulted in the final version. After implementation clinicians conducted CAPS-5 interviews with 669 trauma-exposed individuals referred for specialized diagnostic assessment. Reliability of the Dutch CAPS-5 was investigated through internal consistency and interrater reliability analyses, and construct validity through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Results: CAPS-5 total severity score showed high internal consistency (α = .90) and interrater reliability (ICC = .98, 95% CI: .94–.99). CAPS-5 diagnosis showed modest interrater reliability (kappa = .59, 95% CI: .20–.98). CFA with alternative PTSD models revealed adequate support for the DSM-5 four-factor model, but a six-factor (Anhedonia) model fit the data best. Conclusions: The Dutch CAPS-5 is a carefully translated instrument with adequate psychometric properties. Current results add to the growing support for more refined (six and seven) factor models for DSM-5 PTSD indicating that the validity and clinical implications of these models should be objective of further research.

The Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) is an extensively validated and widely used structured diagnostic interview for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The CAPS was recently revised to correspond with PTSD criteria in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). This article describes the development of the CAPS for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) and presents the results of an initial psychometric evaluation of CAPS-5 scores in 2 samples of military veterans (Ns = 165 and 207). CAPS-5 diagnosis demonstrated strong interrater reliability (к = .78 to 1.00, depending on the scoring rule) and test-retest reliability (к = .83), as well as strong correspondence with a diagnosis based on the CAPS for DSM-IV (CAPS-IV; к = .84 when optimally calibrated). CAPS-5 total severity score demonstrated high internal consistency (α = .88) and interrater reliability (ICC = .91) and good test-retest reliability (ICC = .78). It also demonstrated good convergent validity with total severity score on the CAPS-IV (r = .83) and PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (r = .66) and good discriminant validity with measures of anxiety, depression, somatization, functional impairment, psychopathy, and alcohol abuse (rs = .02 to .54). Overall, these results indicate that the CAPS-5 is a psychometrically sound measure of DSM-5 PTSD diagnosis and symptom severity. Importantly, the CAPS-5 strongly corresponds with the CAPS-IV, which suggests that backward compatibility with the CAPS-IV was maintained and that the CAPS-5 provides continuity in evidence-based assessment of PTSD in the transition from DSM-IV to DSM-5 criteria. (PsycINFO Database Record [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• PLC-5 is adequate to detect probable PTSD cases after a natural disaster in Mexicans. • The 8-item PCL-5 is recommended for screening and monitoring PTSD symptoms. • The 8-item PCL-5 showed more consistent diagnostic utility across time. Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a common and disabling condition developing in one of four survivors after an earthquake. Brief and self-reported validated measures for assessing PTSD symptom severity are necessary to improve care access and assess disorder progress and treatment response. Therefore, we evaluated the psychometric properties of the PTSD-Checklist for the DSM-5 (PCL-5) of 20-, 8- and 4-item in patients that sought specialized mental health services after a catastrophic earthquake that stroke Mexico on September 19th, 2017. The internal consistency of 20-, 8- and 4-item PCL-5 was adequate (≥.7). Using the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) as a reference, signal detection analyses revealed a PCL-5 score of 27 as optimal (sensitivity =.96, specificity =.73) for identifying probable PTSD cases. The shortened versions highly correlated with the full PCL-5 and had comparable diagnostic utility. Our results indicate that the 20-item PCL-5 and the abridged versions can effectively identify possible PTSD cases. The 8-item version has better psychometric properties and more consistent diagnostic utility across time and civil populations. These measures must be evaluated in independent samples to corroborate their utility in different populations and regarding diverse traumatic events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2013, the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale, the golden standard to assess PTSD, was adapted to the DSM-5 (CAPS-5). Objective: This project aimed to develop a clinically relevant Dutch translation of the CAPS-5 and to investigate its psychometric properties. Method: We conducted a stepped translation including Delphi rounds with a crowd of 44 Dutch psychotrauma experts and five senior psychotrauma experts. Using partial crowd-translations, two professional translations and the official Dutch translation of the DSM-5, each senior expert aggregated one independent translation. Consensus was reached plenary. After back-translation, comparison with the original CAPS-5 and field testing, a last round with the senior experts resulted in the final version. After implementation clinicians conducted CAPS-5 interviews with 669 trauma-exposed individuals referred for specialized diagnostic assessment. Reliability of the Dutch CAPS-5 was investigated through internal consistency and interrater reliability analyses, and construct validity through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Results: CAPS-5 total severity score showed high internal consistency (α = .90) and interrater reliability (ICC = .98, 95% CI:.94-.99). CAPS-5 diagnosis showed modest interrater reliability (kappa = .59, 95% CI:.20-.98). CFA with alternative PTSD models revealed adequate support for the DSM-5 four-factor model, but a six-factor (Anhedonia) model fit the data best. Conclusions: The Dutch CAPS-5 is a carefully translated instrument with adequate psychometric properties. Current results add to the growing support for more refined (six and seven) factor models for DSM-5 PTSD indicating that the validity and clinical implications of these models should be objective of further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]