首页> 外文期刊>Journal of anxiety disorders >An evaluation of the DSM-5 factor structure for posttraumatic stress disorder in survivors of traumatic injury
【24h】

An evaluation of the DSM-5 factor structure for posttraumatic stress disorder in survivors of traumatic injury

机译:创伤性损伤幸存者中损伤后患者患者的DSM-5因子结构的评价

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Confirmatory factor analytic studies of the latent structure of DSM-5 PTSD symptoms using self-report data (Elhai et al., 2012; Miller et al., 2013) have found that the four-factor model implied by the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria provided adequate fit to their data. However, the fit of this model is yet to be assessed using data derived from gold standard structured interview measures. This study evaluated the fit of the DSM-5 four-factor model and an alternative four-factor model in 570 injury survivors six years post-injury using the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (Blake et al., 1990), updated to include items measuring new DSM-5 symptoms. While both four-factor models fitted the data well, very high correlations between the 'Intrusions' and 'Avoidance' factors in both models and between the 'Negative Alterations in Cognitions and Mood' and 'Arousal and Reactivity' factors in the DSM-5 model and the 'Dysphoria' and 'Hyperarousal' factors in the alternative model were evident, suggesting that a more parsimonious two-factor model combining these pairs of factors may adequately represent the latent structure. Such a two-factor model fitted the data less well according to chi(2) difference testing, but demonstrated broadly equivalent fit using other fit indices. Relationships between the factors of each of the four-factor models and the latent factors of Fear and Anxious-Misery/Distress underlying Internalizing disorders (Krueger, 1999) were also explored, with findings providing further support for the close relationship between the Intrusion and Avoidance factors. However, these findings also suggested that there may be some utility to distinguishing Negative Alterations in Cognition and Mood symptoms from Arousal and Reactivity symptoms, and/or Dysphoria symptoms from Hyperarousal symptoms. Further studies are required to assess the potential discriminant validity of the two four-factor models. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:使用自我报告数据的DSM-5 PTSD症状潜在结构的验证因子分析研究(Elhai等,2012; Miller等,2013)发现,DSM-5诊断标准所暗示的四因素模型提供足够适合其数据。然而,使用来自黄金标准结构面试措施的数据来评估该模型的适合。本研究评估了DSM-5四因素模型的拟合和570次损伤的替代四因素模型,使用临床医生的PTSD规模(Blake等,1990),更新以包括测量物品新的DSM-5症状。虽然两个因素模型都拟合了数据良好的数据,但在两种模型中的“入侵”和“避免”因子之间的相关性以及“认知和情绪的负变化”和“唤醒和反应性”因子之间的相关性,而DSM-5之间的关系替代模型中的模型和“困难”和“冗余”因子是明显的,这表明组合这些因素对的更加令人垂涎的双因素模型可以充分代表潜在结构。这种双因素模型根据Chi(2)差异测试,符合较少的数据,但使用其他拟合指标展示广泛相当于拟合。还探讨了四因素模型中每一个的因素与恐惧和焦虑/窘迫的潜在因素(Krueger,1999)之间的关系,同时进一步支持入侵和避免之间的密切关系因素。然而,这些调查结果也表明,可能有一些效用,以区分认知和情绪症状的负面改变以及来自谐波的反应性症状,以及来自古围绕症状的疑似症状。需要进一步的研究来评估两个四因素模型的潜在判别有效性。 (c)2014年elestvier有限公司保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号