Validation of the International Trauma Interview (ITI) among treatment-seeking people with adverse childhood experiences in South Korea.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Hyunjung Choi, Hae Seong Lee, Neil P Roberts
{"title":"Validation of the International Trauma Interview (ITI) among treatment-seeking people with adverse childhood experiences in South Korea.","authors":"Hyunjung Choi, Hae Seong Lee, Neil P Roberts","doi":"10.1080/20008066.2024.2447182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> The International Trauma Interview (ITI) is a clinician-administered assessment that has been newly developed for the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) diagnoses of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD (CPTSD).<b>Objective:</b> The current study evaluated the psychometric properties of the ITI for treatment-seeking people with adverse childhood experiences (ACE) in South Korea, with the aims of verifying the validity and reliability of ITI as well as examining the differentiation of ICD-11 CPTSD and borderline personality disorder (BPD).<b>Methods:</b> In total, data of 103 people were analysed. Clinical psychologists conducted the ITI and the structured interview for BPD. Along with the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ), self-report measurements on ACE, adulthood trauma, emotion dysregulation, dissociation, depression, adult attachment, BPD symptoms, self-harm, self-compassion, and quality of life were collected. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to examine the factorial validity and a structural equation model (SEM) was used to evaluate the convergent and discriminant validity.<b>Results:</b> The CFA supported the second-order two-factor model of ICD-11 CPTSD. However, we determined that the alternatively suggested second-order two-factor model of reexperience avoidance combined PTSD and DSO described the data the best. As was hypothesized, ITI PTSD and DSO showed convergent and discriminant validity, and ITI DSO also showed distinctive features with BPD. Interrater reliability and composite reliability were both found to be acceptable. Agreement and consistency between ITQ and ITI were also fair although tentative.<b>Conclusions:</b> The ITI is determined to be a valid and reliable method for the assessment and diagnosis of ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD, and it is considered to be promising for the differential diagnosis of BPD in South Korean treatment-seeking people with ACE. Future research should aim to assess the agreement between ITI and ITQ while also seeking alternative criteria for ITI PTSD across variant trauma memory features.</p>","PeriodicalId":12055,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychotraumatology","volume":"16 1","pages":"2447182"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11705543/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychotraumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2024.2447182","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The International Trauma Interview (ITI) is a clinician-administered assessment that has been newly developed for the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) diagnoses of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD (CPTSD).Objective: The current study evaluated the psychometric properties of the ITI for treatment-seeking people with adverse childhood experiences (ACE) in South Korea, with the aims of verifying the validity and reliability of ITI as well as examining the differentiation of ICD-11 CPTSD and borderline personality disorder (BPD).Methods: In total, data of 103 people were analysed. Clinical psychologists conducted the ITI and the structured interview for BPD. Along with the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ), self-report measurements on ACE, adulthood trauma, emotion dysregulation, dissociation, depression, adult attachment, BPD symptoms, self-harm, self-compassion, and quality of life were collected. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to examine the factorial validity and a structural equation model (SEM) was used to evaluate the convergent and discriminant validity.Results: The CFA supported the second-order two-factor model of ICD-11 CPTSD. However, we determined that the alternatively suggested second-order two-factor model of reexperience avoidance combined PTSD and DSO described the data the best. As was hypothesized, ITI PTSD and DSO showed convergent and discriminant validity, and ITI DSO also showed distinctive features with BPD. Interrater reliability and composite reliability were both found to be acceptable. Agreement and consistency between ITQ and ITI were also fair although tentative.Conclusions: The ITI is determined to be a valid and reliable method for the assessment and diagnosis of ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD, and it is considered to be promising for the differential diagnosis of BPD in South Korean treatment-seeking people with ACE. Future research should aim to assess the agreement between ITI and ITQ while also seeking alternative criteria for ITI PTSD across variant trauma memory features.

验证国际创伤访谈(ITI)在寻求治疗的人有不良的童年经历在韩国。
背景:国际创伤访谈(ITI)是国际疾病分类(ICD-11)诊断创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)和复杂创伤后应激障碍(CPTSD)新开发的临床管理评估。目的:本研究对韩国寻求治疗的不良童年经历(ACE)患者的ITI心理测量特性进行评估,目的是验证ITI的效度和信度,并检查ICD-11 CPTSD和边缘型人格障碍(BPD)的区分。方法:对103例患者的资料进行分析。临床心理学家对BPD进行了ITI和结构化访谈。与国际创伤问卷(ITQ)一起,收集了ACE、成人创伤、情绪失调、分离、抑郁、成人依恋、BPD症状、自我伤害、自我同情和生活质量的自我报告测量结果。采用验证性因子分析(CFA)检验因子效度,采用结构方程模型(SEM)评价收敛效度和判别效度。结果:CFA支持ICD-11 CPTSD的二级双因素模型。然而,我们确定交替建议的二阶双因素模型结合PTSD和DSO描述数据最好。假设ITI PTSD与DSO具有收敛效度和判别效度,且ITI DSO与BPD具有显著的特征。相互信度和复合信度均可接受。ITQ和ITI之间的协议和一致性虽然是暂时的,但也是公平的。结论:ITI被认为是评估和诊断ICD-11 PTSD和CPTSD的有效和可靠的方法,在韩国寻求ACE治疗的BPD鉴别诊断中具有前景。未来的研究应旨在评估ITI和ITQ之间的一致性,同时寻求跨越不同创伤记忆特征的ITI PTSD的替代标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
12.00%
发文量
153
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) is a peer-reviewed open access interdisciplinary journal owned by the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS). The European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) aims to engage scholars, clinicians and researchers in the vital issues of how to understand, prevent and treat the consequences of stress and trauma, including but not limited to, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive disorders, substance abuse, burnout, and neurobiological or physical consequences, using the latest research or clinical experience in these areas. The journal shares ESTSS’ mission to advance and disseminate scientific knowledge about traumatic stress. Papers may address individual events, repeated or chronic (complex) trauma, large scale disasters, or violence. Being open access, the European Journal of Psychotraumatology is also evidence of ESTSS’ stand on free accessibility of research publications to a wider community via the web. The European Journal of Psychotraumatology seeks to attract contributions from academics and practitioners from diverse professional backgrounds, including, but not restricted to, those in mental health, social sciences, and health and welfare services. Contributions from outside Europe are welcome. The journal welcomes original basic and clinical research articles that consolidate and expand the theoretical and professional basis of the field of traumatic stress; Review articles including meta-analyses; short communications presenting new ideas or early-stage promising research; study protocols that describe proposed or ongoing research; case reports examining a single individual or event in a real‑life context; clinical practice papers sharing experience from the clinic; letters to the Editor debating articles already published in the Journal; inaugural Lectures; conference abstracts and book reviews. Both quantitative and qualitative research is welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信