Li Jina, Wang Weiwei, Hu Wei, Yuan Ziyue, Zhou Ruifu, Zhang Weijun, Qu Zhiyong
Center for Behavioral Health & School of Social Development and Public Policy, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, P.R.China.
Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2021 Mar 11;12(1):1888525. doi: 10.1080/20008198.2021.1888525.
: Given that the validity of applying complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) in nonclinical children remains unclear. : The current study aimed to explore the factor structure, discriminant validity, and risk factors of ICD-11 posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and CPTSD using the International Trauma Questionnaire. : A total of 3478 trauma-exposed Chinese children aged 9-12 years were included in this study. All participants were assessed for PTSD and CPTSD using the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to explore the factor structure of CPTSD in a sample of Chinese children. Latent class analysis (LCA) was employed to evaluate the discriminant validity of CPTSD symptoms. Multinomial logistic regression analyses determined associations between the different classes and traumatic events. : The CFA results showed that the first-order six-factor model was identified as the best-fitting model in Chinese children aged 9-12 years. Four different classes, CPTSD symptoms, PTSD symptoms, disturbances in self-organization (DSO) symptoms, and a low symptom class were found by LCA. Both prolonged interpersonal trauma and other types of trauma were risk factors for the CPTSD class and the PTSD class. : The results of this study partially support the factorial validity and strongly support the discriminant validity of the ICD-11 proposals for PTSD and CPTSD in Chinese children, supporting the conceptualization of PTSD and CPTSD as sibling diagnoses based on the ICD-11. However, findings suggest the need for careful consideration of identified trauma types in the ICD-11 proposals.
鉴于在非临床儿童中应用复杂创伤后应激障碍(CPTSD)的有效性尚不清楚。本研究旨在使用国际创伤问卷探索国际疾病分类第11版(ICD - 11)创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)和CPTSD的因子结构、区分效度及危险因素。本研究纳入了3478名9至12岁有过创伤经历的中国儿童。所有参与者均使用国际创伤问卷(ITQ)评估PTSD和CPTSD。进行验证性因子分析(CFA)以探索中国儿童样本中CPTSD的因子结构。采用潜在类别分析(LCA)评估CPTSD症状的区分效度。多项逻辑回归分析确定不同类别与创伤事件之间的关联。CFA结果显示,一阶六因子模型被确定为9至12岁中国儿童的最佳拟合模型。LCA发现了四个不同类别,即CPTSD症状、PTSD症状、自我组织障碍(DSO)症状和低症状类别。长期人际创伤和其他类型的创伤都是CPTSD类别和PTSD类别的危险因素。本研究结果部分支持了ICD - 11中PTSD和CPTSD提议在中国儿童中的因子效度,并强烈支持其区分效度,支持将PTSD和CPTSD视为基于ICD - 11的同类诊断的概念化。然而,研究结果表明需要仔细考虑ICD - 11提议中确定的创伤类型。