Cited by 215Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Empirical examination of a proposed refinement to DSM-IV posttraumatic stress disorder symptom criteria using the National Comorbidity Survey Replication data

Elhai, Jon D., Grubaugh, Anouk L., Kashdan, Todd B., Frueh, B. Christopher·2008·The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Recently, changes have been proposed to DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to refine the diagnosis because of concerns about its construct validity. Specifically, Spitzer et al. suggested narrowing the PTSD definition of trauma, specifying a symptom onset time frame after the trauma, and removing symptoms that overlap with other anxiety and mood disorders. We examined whether removing these overlapping anxiety/mood disorder symptoms resulted in differences (compared to the original DSM-IV PTSD criteria) in PTSD prevalence rates, diagnostic caseness, comorbidity and mental health-related disability, structural validity, and internal consistency. METHOD: Cross-sectional data were examined from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (N = 5692), a multistage area household probability sample of U.S. residents. PTSD diagnostic and symptom data and diagnostic data for other Axis I disorders were taken from the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. The study was conducted from February 2001 to December 2003. RESULTS: After removing PTSD symptoms overlapping with those of other anxiety and mood disorders, we found that the lifetime PTSD prevalence dropped only from 6.81% to 6.42%. Nevertheless, a sizeable proportion of PTSD-diagnosed persons would consequently lose PTSD caseness. Little difference was found between the criteria sets in diagnostic comorbidity and disability, structural validity, and internal consistency. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide evidence that PTSD's overlapping anxiety and mood disorder symptoms are not responsible for PTSD's prevalence, diagnostic comorbidity, and construct validity. Although the proposed symptom criteria revision would result in fewer symptoms by which to evaluate PTSD, it may not address questions raised about the diagnosis' construct validity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4088/jcp.v69n0411

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • According to data from the National Comorbidity Survey, of those diagnosed with PTSD, 54% reported having a major depressive episode, 28% reported having GAD, 28% reported alcohol abuse/dependence, and over 43% identified as having three or more other diagnosed conditions.

    “According to data from the National Comorbidity Survey, of those diagnosed with PTSD, 54% reported having a major depressive episode, 28% reported having GAD, 28% reported alcohol abuse/dependence, and over 43% identified as having three or more other diagnosed conditions [68].”
  • Symptoms from a specific mental health condition will not cause another mental health condition but rather increase the susceptibility to separate, independent comorbidities.

    “This suggests that symptoms from a specific mental health condition will not cause another mental health condition but rather increase the susceptibility to separate, independent comorbidities.”
  • After controlling for overlapping symptoms, the overall PTSD prevalence only decreased by 0.39%, from 6.81 to 6.42%.

    “After controlling for overlapping symptoms, the overall PTSD prevalence only decreased by 0.39%, from 6.81 to 6.42% [68].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Elhai, J. D., Grubaugh, A. L., Kashdan, T. B., & Frueh, B. C.
Affiliations
  • University of South Dakota (US)
  • Medical University of South Carolina (US)
  • George Mason University (US)
  • Houston Methodist (US)
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Published
2008-04-15
Volume
69
Issue
4
Pages
597-602
ISSN
0160-6689 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2065089903
Cited by
215
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 11
FWCI
21.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
post-traumatic stress disorder, DSM-IV diagnostic criteria, construct validity, PTSD prevalence, structural validity, internal consistency, National Comorbidity Survey Replication
MeSH terms
Anxiety Disorders, Cross-Sectional Studies, Disability Evaluation, Humans, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, United States, Reproducibility of Results, Comorbidity, Prevalence, Empirical Research, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

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