Elizabeth L Griffith, Banan Ramarushton, Kathryn P Davis, Ateka A Contractor, Adriel Boals
{"title":"创伤亚群与创伤后健康结果之间的关系:潜类分析。","authors":"Elizabeth L Griffith, Banan Ramarushton, Kathryn P Davis, Ateka A Contractor, Adriel Boals","doi":"10.1037/tra0001787","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In trauma research, it is common for researchers to characterize participants as either \"trauma exposed\" or \"not trauma exposed\" regardless of nuanced differences of the potentially traumatic event (PTE). To our knowledge, no study has simultaneously examined differences across both PTEs and exposure types.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Using latent class analysis, we investigated latent homogeneous subgroups of individuals following experiences of 16 PTEs via three exposure types (i.e., direct, indirect, and/or occupational). We further examined class differences regarding posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom clusters, event centrality, depression, and anxiety. Our sample included 2,663 participants (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 22.33; 56.0% female).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results indicated four latent subgroups: (a) occupational trauma (OT), (b) direct interpersonal trauma (DIT), (c) indirect trauma (IT), and (d) low trauma exposure (LTE). Individuals in the OT class reported the highest levels of all symptoms except for PTSD avoidance and event centrality (which were highest in the DIT class), and individuals in the LTE class reported the lowest levels of all symptoms. Several nuanced between-class differences were found regarding posttrauma outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings further support the notion that dichotomizing participants as \"trauma exposed\" or \"not trauma exposed\" is overly simplistic and ignores important variability in trauma research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20982,"journal":{"name":"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relations between trauma-based subgroups and posttrauma health outcomes: A latent class analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth L Griffith, Banan Ramarushton, Kathryn P Davis, Ateka A Contractor, Adriel Boals\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/tra0001787\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In trauma research, it is common for researchers to characterize participants as either \\\"trauma exposed\\\" or \\\"not trauma exposed\\\" regardless of nuanced differences of the potentially traumatic event (PTE). To our knowledge, no study has simultaneously examined differences across both PTEs and exposure types.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Using latent class analysis, we investigated latent homogeneous subgroups of individuals following experiences of 16 PTEs via three exposure types (i.e., direct, indirect, and/or occupational). We further examined class differences regarding posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom clusters, event centrality, depression, and anxiety. Our sample included 2,663 participants (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 22.33; 56.0% female).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results indicated four latent subgroups: (a) occupational trauma (OT), (b) direct interpersonal trauma (DIT), (c) indirect trauma (IT), and (d) low trauma exposure (LTE). Individuals in the OT class reported the highest levels of all symptoms except for PTSD avoidance and event centrality (which were highest in the DIT class), and individuals in the LTE class reported the lowest levels of all symptoms. Several nuanced between-class differences were found regarding posttrauma outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings further support the notion that dichotomizing participants as \\\"trauma exposed\\\" or \\\"not trauma exposed\\\" is overly simplistic and ignores important variability in trauma research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20982,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0001787\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0001787","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Relations between trauma-based subgroups and posttrauma health outcomes: A latent class analysis.
Objective: In trauma research, it is common for researchers to characterize participants as either "trauma exposed" or "not trauma exposed" regardless of nuanced differences of the potentially traumatic event (PTE). To our knowledge, no study has simultaneously examined differences across both PTEs and exposure types.
Method: Using latent class analysis, we investigated latent homogeneous subgroups of individuals following experiences of 16 PTEs via three exposure types (i.e., direct, indirect, and/or occupational). We further examined class differences regarding posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom clusters, event centrality, depression, and anxiety. Our sample included 2,663 participants (Mage = 22.33; 56.0% female).
Results: Results indicated four latent subgroups: (a) occupational trauma (OT), (b) direct interpersonal trauma (DIT), (c) indirect trauma (IT), and (d) low trauma exposure (LTE). Individuals in the OT class reported the highest levels of all symptoms except for PTSD avoidance and event centrality (which were highest in the DIT class), and individuals in the LTE class reported the lowest levels of all symptoms. Several nuanced between-class differences were found regarding posttrauma outcomes.
Conclusions: Findings further support the notion that dichotomizing participants as "trauma exposed" or "not trauma exposed" is overly simplistic and ignores important variability in trauma research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy publishes empirical research on the psychological effects of trauma. The journal is intended to be a forum for an interdisciplinary discussion on trauma, blending science, theory, practice, and policy.
The journal publishes empirical research on a wide range of trauma-related topics, including:
-Psychological treatments and effects
-Promotion of education about effects of and treatment for trauma
-Assessment and diagnosis of trauma
-Pathophysiology of trauma reactions
-Health services (delivery of services to trauma populations)
-Epidemiological studies and risk factor studies
-Neuroimaging studies
-Trauma and cultural competence