Suppr超能文献

评估有和无 A2 标准诊断的创伤后应激障碍症状在经历战争的青年中的因素结构。

Assessing the factor structure of posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in war-exposed youths with and without Criterion A2 endorsement.

机构信息

Faculty of Life and Health Sciences, School of Psychology, University of Ulster at Magee Campus, L'Derry BT48 7JL, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom.

出版信息

J Anxiety Disord. 2011 Jan;25(1):80-7. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2010.08.006. Epub 2010 Aug 13.

Abstract

Posttraumatic stress disorder's (PTSD) tripartite factor structure proposed by the DSM-IV is rarely empirically supported. Other four-factor models (King et al., 1998; Simms et al., 2002) have proven to better account for PTSD's latent structure; however, results regarding model superiority are conflicting. The current study assessed whether endorsement of PTSD's Criterion A2 would impact on the factorial invariance of the King et al. (1998) model. Participants were 1572 war-exposed Bosnian secondary students who were assessed two years following the 1992-1995 Bosnian conflict. The sample was grouped by those endorsing both parts of the DSM-IV Criterion A (A2 Group) and those endorsing only A1 (Non-A2 Group). The factorial invariance of the King et al. (1998) model was not supported between the A2 vs. Non-A2 Groups; rather, the groups significantly differed on all model parameters. The impact of removing A2 on the factor structure of King et al. (1998) PTSD model is discussed in light of the proposed removal of Criterion A2 for the DSM-V.

摘要

创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的 DSM-IV 提出的三分体因素结构很少得到实证支持。其他四项因素模型(King 等人,1998 年;Simms 等人,2002 年)已被证明能更好地说明 PTSD 的潜在结构;然而,关于模型优越性的结果却存在冲突。本研究评估了 PTSD 的标准 A2 的认可是否会影响 King 等人(1998 年)模型的因子不变性。参与者是 1572 名曾经历过战争的波斯尼亚中学生,他们在 1992-1995 年波斯尼亚冲突后两年接受了评估。该样本根据那些同时认可 DSM-IV 标准 A 的两部分(A2 组)和仅认可 A1 的人(非 A2 组)进行分组。King 等人(1998 年)模型的因子不变性在 A2 与非 A2 组之间不成立;相反,两组在所有模型参数上都有显著差异。考虑到 DSM-V 中对标准 A2 的删除,讨论了删除 A2 对 King 等人(1998 年)PTSD 模型的因素结构的影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验