Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 977

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessment of a new self-rating scale for post-traumatic stress disorder

DAVIDSON, J. R. T., BOOK, S. W., COLKET, J. T., TUPLER, L. A., ROTH, S., DAVID, D., HERTZBERG, M., MELLMAN, T., BECKHAM, J. C., SMITH, R. D., DAVISON, R. M., KATZ, R., FELDMAN, M. E.·1997·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background. In post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) there is a need for self-rating scales that are sensitive to treatment effects and have been tested in a broad range of trauma survivors. Separate measures of frequency and severity may also provide an advantage. Methods. Three hundred and fifty-three men and women completed the Davidson Trauma Scale (DTS), a 17-item scale measuring each DSM-IV symptom of PTSD on 5-point frequency and severity scales. These subjects comprised war veterans, survivors of rape or hurricane and a mixed trauma group participating in a clinical trial. Other scales were included as validity checks as follows: Global ratings, SCL-90-R, Eysenck Scale, Impact of Event Scale and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R. Results. The scale demonstrated good test–retest reliability (r = 0·86), internal consistency (r = 0·99). One main factor emerged for severity and a smaller one for intrusion. In PTSD diagnosed subjects, and the factor structure more closely resembled the traditional grouping of symptoms. Concurrent validity was obtained against the SCID, with a diagnostic accuracy of 83% at a DTS score of 40. Good convergent and divergent validity was obtained. The DTS showed predictive validity against response to treatment, as well as being sensitive to treatment effects. Conclusions. The DTS showed good reliability and validity, and offers promised as a scale which is particularly suited to assessing symptom severity, treatment outcome and in screening for the likely diagnosis of PTSD.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291796004229

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 977

Metadata

Authors
DAVIDSON, J. R. T., BOOK, S. W., COLKET, J. T., TUPLER, L. A., ROTH, S., DAVID, D., HERTZBERG, M., MELLMAN, T., BECKHAM, J. C., SMITH, R. D., DAVISON, R. M., KATZ, R., & FELDMAN, M. E.
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
1997-01
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
153-160
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2027845679
Cited by
977
References
2
FWCI
17.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Assessment of a new self-rating scale for post-traumatic stress disorder. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0033291796004229
The paper
DAVIDSON, J. R. T., BOOK, S. W., COLKET, J. T., TUPLER, L. A., ROTH, S., DAVID, D., HERTZBERG, M., MELLMAN, T., BECKHAM, J. C., SMITH, R. D., DAVISON, R. M., KATZ, R., & FELDMAN, M. E. (1997). Assessment of a new self-rating scale for post-traumatic stress disorder. Psychological Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291796004229

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.