Mikael Rubin, Anna Alban Foulser, Emma Siegel, Jasper A J Smits, Mark B Powers, Abigail Angkaw, Michael J Telch
{"title":"根据创伤事件的自我报告描述确定创伤后应激障碍标准 a 时,可靠性较低:需要透明的方法。","authors":"Mikael Rubin, Anna Alban Foulser, Emma Siegel, Jasper A J Smits, Mark B Powers, Abigail Angkaw, Michael J Telch","doi":"10.1037/tra0001477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Exposure to a traumatic event is a primary criterion (Criterion A) for meeting Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Using self-report to establish diagnostic criteria in research has become more common, especially with internet-based research. However, some individuals may construe events as traumatic when they do not meet Criterion A. There has yet to be a test of interrater reliability (IRR) from self-report of traumatic events.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Three graduate students in clinical psychology and three licensed psychologists rated Criterion A using the life events checklist (LEC), as well as the three modified LEC versions (specification of up to three index traumas; extension of part 2 of the LEC) aimed to increase IRR. One hundred participants completed each of the four versions of the LEC (<i>N</i> = 400). Bootstrapped permutation tests were used to estimate differences in IRR and to generate 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, findings indicated fair-moderate IRR (Fleiss's kappa) κ = 0.428, 95% CI [0.379, 0.477]. The other versions of the LEC (including additional clarifying questions in part 2 of the LEC and/or opportunities to describe up to three traumas) did not meaningfully increase IRR.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings indicate that relying on self-report from the LEC alone and/or single-rater assessment of open-text trauma descriptions is not recommended for determining whether a traumatic event meets Criterion A. We conclude that it is critical when collecting self-reported PTSD symptoms to provide a clear description of how Criterion A was assessed, initial agreement between raters, and how disagreements were resolved. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20982,"journal":{"name":"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy","volume":" ","pages":"435-442"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Low reliability when determining criterion a for posttraumatic stress disorder from self-report descriptions of traumatic events: The need for transparent methods.\",\"authors\":\"Mikael Rubin, Anna Alban Foulser, Emma Siegel, Jasper A J Smits, Mark B Powers, Abigail Angkaw, Michael J Telch\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/tra0001477\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Exposure to a traumatic event is a primary criterion (Criterion A) for meeting Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Using self-report to establish diagnostic criteria in research has become more common, especially with internet-based research. However, some individuals may construe events as traumatic when they do not meet Criterion A. There has yet to be a test of interrater reliability (IRR) from self-report of traumatic events.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Three graduate students in clinical psychology and three licensed psychologists rated Criterion A using the life events checklist (LEC), as well as the three modified LEC versions (specification of up to three index traumas; extension of part 2 of the LEC) aimed to increase IRR. One hundred participants completed each of the four versions of the LEC (<i>N</i> = 400). Bootstrapped permutation tests were used to estimate differences in IRR and to generate 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, findings indicated fair-moderate IRR (Fleiss's kappa) κ = 0.428, 95% CI [0.379, 0.477]. The other versions of the LEC (including additional clarifying questions in part 2 of the LEC and/or opportunities to describe up to three traumas) did not meaningfully increase IRR.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings indicate that relying on self-report from the LEC alone and/or single-rater assessment of open-text trauma descriptions is not recommended for determining whether a traumatic event meets Criterion A. We conclude that it is critical when collecting self-reported PTSD symptoms to provide a clear description of how Criterion A was assessed, initial agreement between raters, and how disagreements were resolved. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20982,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"435-442\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"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/tra0001477\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"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/tra0001477","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:创伤事件暴露是创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的主要标准(标准 A)。在研究中使用自我报告来确定诊断标准已变得越来越普遍,尤其是基于互联网的研究。然而,有些人可能会将不符合标准 A 的事件视为创伤性事件。目前还没有对创伤性事件自我报告的交互可靠性(IRR)进行测试:方法:三名临床心理学研究生和三名持证心理学家使用生活事件检查表(LEC)对标准 A 进行评分,并使用三个旨在提高内部信度的修改版 LEC(最多指定三个指数创伤;LEC 第 2 部分的扩展)进行评分。100 名参与者分别完成了四个版本的 LEC(N = 400)。采用引导置换测试来估计IRR的差异,并得出95%的置信区间(CIs):总体而言,研究结果表明IRR(弗莱斯卡帕)κ = 0.428,95% CI [0.379, 0.477],处于中等水平。其他版本的 LEC(包括 LEC 第 2 部分的附加澄清问题和/或描述最多三次创伤的机会)并没有显著提高 IRR:研究结果表明,在确定创伤事件是否符合标准 A 时,不建议仅依赖 LEC 的自我报告和/或单个评分者对开放文本的创伤描述进行评估。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
Low reliability when determining criterion a for posttraumatic stress disorder from self-report descriptions of traumatic events: The need for transparent methods.
Objective: Exposure to a traumatic event is a primary criterion (Criterion A) for meeting Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Using self-report to establish diagnostic criteria in research has become more common, especially with internet-based research. However, some individuals may construe events as traumatic when they do not meet Criterion A. There has yet to be a test of interrater reliability (IRR) from self-report of traumatic events.
Method: Three graduate students in clinical psychology and three licensed psychologists rated Criterion A using the life events checklist (LEC), as well as the three modified LEC versions (specification of up to three index traumas; extension of part 2 of the LEC) aimed to increase IRR. One hundred participants completed each of the four versions of the LEC (N = 400). Bootstrapped permutation tests were used to estimate differences in IRR and to generate 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results: Overall, findings indicated fair-moderate IRR (Fleiss's kappa) κ = 0.428, 95% CI [0.379, 0.477]. The other versions of the LEC (including additional clarifying questions in part 2 of the LEC and/or opportunities to describe up to three traumas) did not meaningfully increase IRR.
Conclusions: Findings indicate that relying on self-report from the LEC alone and/or single-rater assessment of open-text trauma descriptions is not recommended for determining whether a traumatic event meets Criterion A. We conclude that it is critical when collecting self-reported PTSD symptoms to provide a clear description of how Criterion A was assessed, initial agreement between raters, and how disagreements were resolved. (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