Posttraumatic stress disorder in diverse populations: Testing for assessment bias in a nationally representative sample.

IF 2.7 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-11 DOI:10.1037/tra0001492
Carolina I Gutierrez, Katherina Arteaga, Ty S Schepis, Alessandro S De Nadai
{"title":"Posttraumatic stress disorder in diverse populations: Testing for assessment bias in a nationally representative sample.","authors":"Carolina I Gutierrez, Katherina Arteaga, Ty S Schepis, Alessandro S De Nadai","doi":"10.1037/tra0001492","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>A growing body of research has emerged to characterize differences in posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom presentations in individuals from diverse racial and ethnic groups. However, less research has examined if these observed differences can be attributed to bias within PTSD assessments. Knowledge about potential bias in PTSD assessment is essential for interpreting group differences. If PTSD assessments do not perform similarly across diverse demographic groups, then observed differences may be artificial products of inaccurate measurement, new assessments could be required for individuals from different demographic groups, and we would be unable to accurately detect PTSD treatment effects in patients from diverse groups.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We evaluated PTSD assessment bias through tests of measurement invariance for the semistructured, clinician-administered AUDADIS-5 diagnostic assessment of participants in the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III. Participants included those who reported having experienced at least one potentially traumatic event in their lifetime (<i>N</i> = 23,936). Measurement invariance was assessed for participants who identified from several demographic groups (Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander; Hispanic; American Indian/Alaskan Native; and Black) compared to participants who identified as White (non-Hispanic).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, PTSD assessment was largely invariant across groups, while small amounts of measurement invariance were detected that can inform future research and clinical adaptations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This work validates prior research that relies on a common conceptualization of PTSD, and it provides several paths for future improvement in research and clinical practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20982,"journal":{"name":"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy","volume":" ","pages":"1252-1259"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","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/tra0001492","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: A growing body of research has emerged to characterize differences in posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom presentations in individuals from diverse racial and ethnic groups. However, less research has examined if these observed differences can be attributed to bias within PTSD assessments. Knowledge about potential bias in PTSD assessment is essential for interpreting group differences. If PTSD assessments do not perform similarly across diverse demographic groups, then observed differences may be artificial products of inaccurate measurement, new assessments could be required for individuals from different demographic groups, and we would be unable to accurately detect PTSD treatment effects in patients from diverse groups.

Method: We evaluated PTSD assessment bias through tests of measurement invariance for the semistructured, clinician-administered AUDADIS-5 diagnostic assessment of participants in the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III. Participants included those who reported having experienced at least one potentially traumatic event in their lifetime (N = 23,936). Measurement invariance was assessed for participants who identified from several demographic groups (Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander; Hispanic; American Indian/Alaskan Native; and Black) compared to participants who identified as White (non-Hispanic).

Results: Overall, PTSD assessment was largely invariant across groups, while small amounts of measurement invariance were detected that can inform future research and clinical adaptations.

Conclusions: This work validates prior research that relies on a common conceptualization of PTSD, and it provides several paths for future improvement in research and clinical practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同人群中的创伤后应激障碍:测试全国代表性样本的评估偏差。
目的:越来越多的研究表明,不同种族和民族的人在创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)症状表现方面存在差异。然而,对于这些观察到的差异是否可归因于创伤后应激障碍评估中的偏差,研究较少。了解 PTSD 评估中的潜在偏差对于解释群体差异至关重要。如果创伤后应激障碍评估在不同人群中的表现不尽相同,那么观察到的差异可能是测量不准确的人为产物,可能需要对不同人群的个体进行新的评估,而我们将无法准确检测不同人群患者的创伤后应激障碍治疗效果:我们通过对全国酒精及相关疾病流行病学调查-III 中的参与者进行半结构化、由临床医生主持的 AUDADIS-5 诊断评估的测量不变性测试,评估了创伤后应激障碍的评估偏差。参与者包括那些报告在其一生中至少经历过一次潜在创伤事件的人(N = 23936)。与白人(非西班牙裔)相比,对来自几个人口群体(亚裔、夏威夷原住民或太平洋岛民、西班牙裔、美国印第安人/阿拉斯加原住民和黑人)的参与者进行了测量不变性评估:结果:总体而言,创伤后应激障碍评估在不同群体之间存在很大程度的不一致性,同时也发现了少量的测量不一致性,这可以为未来的研究和临床调整提供参考:结论:这项研究验证了之前基于创伤后应激障碍共同概念化的研究,并为未来研究和临床实践的改进提供了几条途径。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
3.20%
发文量
427
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
期刊最新文献
The worst of times: Using a transformative mixed-methods study to name and describe school-based adverse racialized experiences (AREs) in the K-12 retrospective accounts of university students. Exploring the role of technology in youth and adolescent deaths by suicide using data from the 2017-2019 National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS). Military sexual trauma, childhood trauma, and combat trauma: Associations with longitudinal posttraumatic growth among U.S. Veterans. Prospective study of individual characteristics and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms following childbirth: Birth satisfaction as a moderator. Assessing similarities and differences in thematic content across online mental health communities dedicated to trauma-related mental health conditions.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1