4.4 Article

ICD-11 Complex PTSD in U.S. National and Veteran Samples: Prevalence and Structural Associations With PTSD

Journal

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE
Volume 3, Issue 2, Pages 215-229

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/2167702614545480

Keywords

complex posttraumatic stress disorder; ICD; factor mixture model; taxonomy

Funding

  1. American Psychiatric Association DSM Research Program
  2. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Mental Health Services grant
  3. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Merit Review Award [5I01CX000431-02]
  4. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Clinical Science & Research Career Development Award
  5. U.S. Department of Defense grant [W81XWH-07-PTSD-IIRA]
  6. South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Institute
  7. Medical University of South Carolina, National Institutes of Health Grants [UL1 RR029882, UL1 TR000062]
  8. NIMH Grant [T32 MH018869]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) is under development, and current proposals include major changes to trauma-related psychiatric diagnoses, including a heavily restricted definition of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and the addition of complex PTSD (CPTSD). We aimed to test the postulates of CPTSD in samples of 2,695 community participants and 323 trauma-exposed military veterans. CPTSD prevalence estimates were 0.6% and 13% in the community and veteran samples, respectively; one quarter to one half of those with PTSD met criteria for CPTSD. There were no differences in trauma exposure across diagnoses. A factor mixture model with two latent dimensional variables and four latent classes provided the best fit in both samples: Classes differed by their level of symptom severity but did not differ as a function of the proposed PTSD versus CPTSD diagnoses. These findings should raise concerns about the distinctions between CPTSD and PTSD proposed for ICD-11.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available