False Positives for Criterion A Trauma Events and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms with Questionnaires Are Common in Children and Adolescents and Could Not be Eliminated with Enhanced Instructions.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
Michael S Scheeringa
{"title":"False Positives for Criterion A Trauma Events and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms with Questionnaires Are Common in Children and Adolescents and Could Not be Eliminated with Enhanced Instructions.","authors":"Michael S Scheeringa","doi":"10.1089/cap.2024.0126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Objective:</i></b> Self-report questionnaires are common for measuring posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The experience of life threat-Criterion A-serves a gatekeeper function for diagnosing PTSD, and evidence suggests false positives are common on questionnaires. It remains unknown how common they are and whether extra instructions can reduce them. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The present study assessed 42 youths, 10-17 years of age, from a clinic setting. Youths and parents completed regular PTSD questionnaires and then enhanced versions with more detailed instructions and examples of Criterion A and non-Criterion A events. Parents completed a semistructured interview as the verification of true versus false positives. <b><i>Results:</i></b> In the full sample, parents endorsed 41 and children endorsed 45 false positive events. The mean was significantly greater than zero for both parents and children. Parents endorsed 59 and children endorsed 138 false positive symptoms. When false positive events were endorsed, this was significantly associated with more false positive symptoms for both parents and children. An enhanced questionnaire failed to reduce false positive events for the full sample. <b><i>Discussion:</i></b> The common occurrence of false positives suggests caution is warranted when interpreting estimates from questionnaire-based research about the prevalence of PTSD. While this attempt to eliminate false positives was not fully successful, there may be other useful enhancements to consider in future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":15277,"journal":{"name":"Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/cap.2024.0126","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Self-report questionnaires are common for measuring posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The experience of life threat-Criterion A-serves a gatekeeper function for diagnosing PTSD, and evidence suggests false positives are common on questionnaires. It remains unknown how common they are and whether extra instructions can reduce them. Methods: The present study assessed 42 youths, 10-17 years of age, from a clinic setting. Youths and parents completed regular PTSD questionnaires and then enhanced versions with more detailed instructions and examples of Criterion A and non-Criterion A events. Parents completed a semistructured interview as the verification of true versus false positives. Results: In the full sample, parents endorsed 41 and children endorsed 45 false positive events. The mean was significantly greater than zero for both parents and children. Parents endorsed 59 and children endorsed 138 false positive symptoms. When false positive events were endorsed, this was significantly associated with more false positive symptoms for both parents and children. An enhanced questionnaire failed to reduce false positive events for the full sample. Discussion: The common occurrence of false positives suggests caution is warranted when interpreting estimates from questionnaire-based research about the prevalence of PTSD. While this attempt to eliminate false positives was not fully successful, there may be other useful enhancements to consider in future research.

标准A创伤事件和创伤后应激障碍症状的假阳性在儿童和青少年中很常见,并且不能通过加强指导来消除。
目的:自我报告问卷是创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的常用测量方法。生命威胁的经历——标准a——是诊断PTSD的把关人,有证据表明,在问卷调查中假阳性是很常见的。目前尚不清楚它们有多普遍,以及额外的指令是否能减少它们。方法:本研究评估了42名10-17岁的青少年,来自诊所。青少年和家长完成了常规的PTSD问卷,然后添加了更详细的说明和标准A和非标准A事件的例子。家长们完成了一个半结构化的访谈,作为对真假阳性的验证。结果:在全样本中,家长认可41例假阳性事件,儿童认可45例假阳性事件。父母和孩子的平均值都明显大于零。家长支持59例,儿童支持138例假阳性症状。当假阳性事件被认可时,这与父母和孩子更多的假阳性症状显著相关。增强型问卷未能减少整个样本的假阳性事件。讨论:假阳性的普遍发生表明,在解释基于问卷调查的PTSD患病率估计时,需要谨慎。虽然这种消除假阳性的尝试并没有完全成功,但在未来的研究中可能会考虑其他有用的增强。
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
3.60
自引率
5.30%
发文量
61
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology (JCAP) is the premier peer-reviewed journal covering the clinical aspects of treating this patient population with psychotropic medications including side effects and interactions, standard doses, and research on new and existing medications. The Journal includes information on related areas of medical sciences such as advances in developmental pharmacokinetics, developmental neuroscience, metabolism, nutrition, molecular genetics, and more. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology coverage includes: New drugs and treatment strategies including the use of psycho-stimulants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, mood stabilizers, and atypical antipsychotics New developments in the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, autism spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, eating disorders, along with other disorders Reports of common and rare Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) including: hyperprolactinemia, galactorrhea, weight gain/loss, metabolic syndrome, dyslipidemia, switching phenomena, sudden death, and the potential increase of suicide. Outcomes research.
×
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