Cited by 34Child Abuse and TraumaChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Validating new summary indices for the Childhood Trauma Interview: Associations with first onsets of major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders.

Open access
Vrshek-Schallhorn, Suzanne, Wolitzky-Taylor, Kate, Doane, Leah D., Epstein, Alyssa, Sumner, Jennifer A., Mineka, Susan, Zinbarg, Richard E., Craske, Michelle G. +3 more·2014·Psychological Assessment

Abstract

Childhood and adolescent adversity is of great interest in relation to risk for psychopathology, and interview measures of adversity are thought to be more reliable and valid than their questionnaire counterparts. One interview measure, the Childhood Trauma Interview (CTI; Fink et al., 1995), has been positively evaluated relative to similar measures, but there are some psychometric limitations to an existing scoring approach that limit the full potential of this measure. We propose several new summary indices for the CTI that permit examination of different types of adversity and different developmental periods. Our approach creates several summary indices: one sums the severity scores of adversities endorsed; another utilizes the number of minor and major (moderate to severe) adversities. The new indices were examined in association with first onsets of major depressive disorder (MDD) and anxiety disorders across a 5-year period using annual clinical diagnostic interviews (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR). Summary scores derived with the previously used approach were also examined for comparison. Data on 332 participants came from the Youth Emotion Project, a longitudinal study of risk for emotional disorders. Results support the predictive validity of the proposed summary scoring methods and indicate that several forms of major (but typically not minor) adversity are significantly associated with first onsets of MDD and anxiety disorders. Finally, multivariate regression models show that, in many instances, the new indices contributed significant unique variance predicting disorder onsets over and above the previously used summary indices.

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 · 10.1037/a0036842

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. First M Spitzer R Gibbon M Williams J 2001 Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I disorders-non-patient edition New York New York State Psychiatric Institute, Biometrics Research Department

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vrshek-Schallhorn, S., Wolitzky-Taylor, K., Doane, L. D., Epstein, A., Sumner, J. A., Mineka, S., Zinbarg, R. E., Craske, M. G., Isaia, A., Hammen, C., & Adam, E. K.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Published
2014-09
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
730-740
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
OpenAlex
W2033075474
Cited by
34
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
5.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • NC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Columbia Academic Commons (Columbia University)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01-MH065652, R01-MH065651, F32-MH091955)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
childhood adversity, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorders, interview scoring, predictive validity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Anxiety Disorders, Child Abuse, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Female, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Psychometrics, Risk Factors, Violence, Reproducibility of Results, Multivariate Analysis, Logistic Models

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