The Child Trauma Screen: A Follow‐Up Validation
Abstract
Although the prevalence of exposure to potentially traumatic events and associated outcomes among children is well documented, widespread trauma screening remains limited. This study provides additional data supporting the psychometrics of the Child Trauma Screen (CTS), a free, brief, empirically derived measure that was intended as a trauma screen for use across child‐serving systems. Participants were an ethnically diverse sample of 187 children aged 6–18 years recruited from an urban children's community mental health clinic. At intake, children and their caregivers completed the CTS and other standardized measures of posttraumatic stress disorder, externalizing behavior, anxiety, and depression. Results indicated that the CTS had strong properties on both child and caregiver reports, including internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .78 for both), convergent validity (r = .83 and r = .86), divergent validity (mean across measures and reporters, r = .31; range r = .01–.70), and criterion validity (sensitivity = 0.83 and 0.76; specificity = 0.95 and 0.79, correct classification 89.3% and 81.4%). Suggested cut points and recommendations for using the CTS as a trauma screen are provided. This study provides further empirical support for the use of the CTS as a brief trauma screening measure and provides recommendations for further research.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
ROC curves for the Child Trauma Screen indicate that requiring a parent reaction score ≥10 will miss approximately 22% of true PTSD cases but will not exclude any who are incorrectly diagnosed.
“ROC curves for this screener [134, 135] indicate that by requiring a score of ≥10 on the parent report for child reaction to past trauma, we will miss diagnosing approximately 22% of true PTSD cases but we will not exclude any who are incorrectly diagnosed.”
From A Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) study of medication and CBT sequencing in the treatment of pediatric anxiety disorders (2021) · cites this paper as [135]
Cites
Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., Koss, M. P., & Marks, J. S. (1998) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0749-3797(98)00017-8 · Cited by 18,943 · see citing works
Tolin, D. F., & Foa, E. B. (2006) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.6.959 · Cited by 2,197 · see citing works
The economic burden of child maltreatment in the United States and implications for prevention
Fang, X., Brown, D. S., Florence, C. S., & Mercy, J. A. (2012) · Child Abuse & Neglect · doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2011.10.006 · Cited by 1,122 · see citing works
Gender differences in posttraumatic stress disorder.
Olff, M., Langeland, W., Draijer, N., & Gersons, B. P. R. (2007) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.2.183 · Cited by 1,058 · see citing works
A meta-analysis of risk factors for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents
Trickey, D., Siddaway, A. P., Meiser-Stedman, R., Serpell, L., & Field, A. P. (2012) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2011.12.001 · Cited by 828 · see citing works
A comparison of item-level and scale-level multiple imputation for questionnaire batteries
Gottschall, A. C., West, S. G., & Enders, C. K. (2012) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1080/00273171.2012.640589 · Cited by 225 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Peterson, B. S., West, A. E., Weisz, J. R., Mack, W. J., Kipke, M. D., Findling, R. L., Mittman, B. S., Bansal, R., Piantadosi, S., Takata, G., et al. (2021) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-021-03314-y · Cited by 13 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lang, J. M., & Connell, C. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Traumatic Stress
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-07-30
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 540-548
- ISSN
- 0894-9867
- 1573-6598
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 6
- Language
- en
- Funders
- Administration for Children and Families (90C01055)
- U.S. Children's Bureau (90CO1069)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review