灾难暴露青年的创伤后应激障碍:使用ICD-11和DSM-5标准检查诊断一致性和模型拟合。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
BreAnne A Danzi, Ellen A Knowles, Rachel C Bock
{"title":"灾难暴露青年的创伤后应激障碍:使用ICD-11和DSM-5标准检查诊断一致性和模型拟合。","authors":"BreAnne A Danzi, Ellen A Knowles, Rachel C Bock","doi":"10.1186/s12887-024-05317-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Competing definitions of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have been proposed by ICD-11 and DSM-5; it is unclear which diagnostic model works best for children and adolescents. Although other studies have predicted the impact of these models by approximating the criteria using older measures, this study advances the research by comparing measures designed to assess ICD-11 and DSM-5 criteria in hurricane-exposed youth. This study evaluates ICD-11 and DSM-5 (both the standard and preschool-age) diagnostic models by identifying diagnostic rates, evaluating diagnostic concordance, investigating the predictive value of constructs associated with PTSD (demographics, disaster threat and exposure, functional impairment), and examining model fit.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The sample was exposed to Hurricane Ian (2022), a deadly Category 5 hurricane. Parents reported on disaster exposure and their child's PTSD symptoms (n = 152; ages 7-17) using the International Trauma Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents Caregiver Version (ITQ-CG) for ICD-11 criteria and UCLA PTSD Reaction Index for DSM-5, Parent/Caregiver Report Version (RI-5) for DSM-5 criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ICD-11 PTSD symptom criteria rates were 24% and dropped to 20% when the impairment criterion was added. PTSD symptom criteria rates were 11% (10% with impairment) for DSM-5 and 13% (12% with impairment) for DSM-5 Preschool. ICD-11 rates were higher than DSM-5 and DSM-5 Preschool rates. There was no difference between DSM-5 and DSM-5 Preschool rates of PTSD. There was moderate to substantial concordance between ICD-11 and the DSM-5 models. All diagnostic models were associated with exposure and impairment, but only ICD-11 was associated with threat. ICD-11 was the only one to evidence acceptable model fit.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Using the ITQ-CG and RI-5 to assess PTSD in youth, results showed higher PTSD diagnostic rates for ICD-11 than DSM-5; this contradicts prior findings (based off approximated ICD-11 criteria) and seems largely due to differences in symptom thresholds used by the two measures. The ITQ-CG exhibited excellent model fit and was associated with several constructs important to PTSD.</p>","PeriodicalId":9144,"journal":{"name":"BMC Pediatrics","volume":"25 1","pages":"24"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11724448/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Posttraumatic stress disorder in disaster-exposed youth: examining diagnostic concordance and model fit using ICD-11 and DSM-5 criteria.\",\"authors\":\"BreAnne A Danzi, Ellen A Knowles, Rachel C Bock\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12887-024-05317-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Competing definitions of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have been proposed by ICD-11 and DSM-5; it is unclear which diagnostic model works best for children and adolescents. Although other studies have predicted the impact of these models by approximating the criteria using older measures, this study advances the research by comparing measures designed to assess ICD-11 and DSM-5 criteria in hurricane-exposed youth. This study evaluates ICD-11 and DSM-5 (both the standard and preschool-age) diagnostic models by identifying diagnostic rates, evaluating diagnostic concordance, investigating the predictive value of constructs associated with PTSD (demographics, disaster threat and exposure, functional impairment), and examining model fit.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The sample was exposed to Hurricane Ian (2022), a deadly Category 5 hurricane. Parents reported on disaster exposure and their child's PTSD symptoms (n = 152; ages 7-17) using the International Trauma Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents Caregiver Version (ITQ-CG) for ICD-11 criteria and UCLA PTSD Reaction Index for DSM-5, Parent/Caregiver Report Version (RI-5) for DSM-5 criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ICD-11 PTSD symptom criteria rates were 24% and dropped to 20% when the impairment criterion was added. PTSD symptom criteria rates were 11% (10% with impairment) for DSM-5 and 13% (12% with impairment) for DSM-5 Preschool. ICD-11 rates were higher than DSM-5 and DSM-5 Preschool rates. There was no difference between DSM-5 and DSM-5 Preschool rates of PTSD. There was moderate to substantial concordance between ICD-11 and the DSM-5 models. All diagnostic models were associated with exposure and impairment, but only ICD-11 was associated with threat. ICD-11 was the only one to evidence acceptable model fit.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Using the ITQ-CG and RI-5 to assess PTSD in youth, results showed higher PTSD diagnostic rates for ICD-11 than DSM-5; this contradicts prior findings (based off approximated ICD-11 criteria) and seems largely due to differences in symptom thresholds used by the two measures. The ITQ-CG exhibited excellent model fit and was associated with several constructs important to PTSD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9144,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Pediatrics\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"24\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11724448/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-024-05317-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-024-05317-6","RegionNum":3,"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

摘要

背景:ICD-11和DSM-5对创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)提出了不同的定义;目前尚不清楚哪种诊断模式对儿童和青少年最有效。虽然其他研究已经通过使用较旧的测量方法近似标准来预测这些模型的影响,但本研究通过比较旨在评估ICD-11和DSM-5标准的方法来推进研究。本研究评估ICD-11和DSM-5(标准和学龄前)诊断模型,通过确定诊断率,评估诊断一致性,调查与PTSD相关的结构(人口统计学,灾难威胁和暴露,功能损害)的预测价值,并检查模型拟合。方法:将样本暴露于飓风伊恩(2022)中,这是一场致命的5级飓风。父母报告了灾难暴露和他们孩子的PTSD症状(n = 152;使用ICD-11标准的国际儿童和青少年创伤问卷(ITQ-CG)和DSM-5标准的UCLA PTSD反应指数,以及DSM-5标准的家长/照顾者报告版本(RI-5)。结果:ICD-11 PTSD症状标准率为24%,添加损伤标准后降至20%。DSM-5的PTSD症状标准率为11%(10%有障碍),而DSM-5学龄前儿童的PTSD症状标准率为13%(12%有障碍)。ICD-11的发病率高于DSM-5和DSM-5学龄前儿童的发病率。在DSM-5和DSM-5中,学龄前PTSD发生率没有差异。ICD-11和DSM-5模型之间有中度到实质性的一致性。所有的诊断模型都与暴露和损伤有关,但只有ICD-11与威胁有关。ICD-11是唯一一个证据可接受的模型拟合。结论:使用ITQ-CG和RI-5评估青少年PTSD,结果显示ICD-11的PTSD诊断率高于DSM-5;这与先前的发现(基于近似的ICD-11标准)相矛盾,似乎主要是由于两种测量方法使用的症状阈值存在差异。ITQ-CG表现出极好的模型拟合,并与创伤后应激障碍的几个重要构念相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Posttraumatic stress disorder in disaster-exposed youth: examining diagnostic concordance and model fit using ICD-11 and DSM-5 criteria.

Background: Competing definitions of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have been proposed by ICD-11 and DSM-5; it is unclear which diagnostic model works best for children and adolescents. Although other studies have predicted the impact of these models by approximating the criteria using older measures, this study advances the research by comparing measures designed to assess ICD-11 and DSM-5 criteria in hurricane-exposed youth. This study evaluates ICD-11 and DSM-5 (both the standard and preschool-age) diagnostic models by identifying diagnostic rates, evaluating diagnostic concordance, investigating the predictive value of constructs associated with PTSD (demographics, disaster threat and exposure, functional impairment), and examining model fit.

Method: The sample was exposed to Hurricane Ian (2022), a deadly Category 5 hurricane. Parents reported on disaster exposure and their child's PTSD symptoms (n = 152; ages 7-17) using the International Trauma Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents Caregiver Version (ITQ-CG) for ICD-11 criteria and UCLA PTSD Reaction Index for DSM-5, Parent/Caregiver Report Version (RI-5) for DSM-5 criteria.

Results: ICD-11 PTSD symptom criteria rates were 24% and dropped to 20% when the impairment criterion was added. PTSD symptom criteria rates were 11% (10% with impairment) for DSM-5 and 13% (12% with impairment) for DSM-5 Preschool. ICD-11 rates were higher than DSM-5 and DSM-5 Preschool rates. There was no difference between DSM-5 and DSM-5 Preschool rates of PTSD. There was moderate to substantial concordance between ICD-11 and the DSM-5 models. All diagnostic models were associated with exposure and impairment, but only ICD-11 was associated with threat. ICD-11 was the only one to evidence acceptable model fit.

Conclusions: Using the ITQ-CG and RI-5 to assess PTSD in youth, results showed higher PTSD diagnostic rates for ICD-11 than DSM-5; this contradicts prior findings (based off approximated ICD-11 criteria) and seems largely due to differences in symptom thresholds used by the two measures. The ITQ-CG exhibited excellent model fit and was associated with several constructs important to PTSD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Pediatrics
BMC Pediatrics PEDIATRICS-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.20%
发文量
683
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Pediatrics is an open access journal publishing peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of health care in neonates, children and adolescents, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
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