Suppr超能文献

超越一刀切:确定《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第5版创伤后应激障碍检查表(PCL-5)的临界值

Beyond one-cutoff-fits-all: determining cutoff values for the PTSD checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5).

作者信息

Pettrich Amelie, Schellong Julia, Dyer Anne, Ehring Thomas, Knaevelsrud Christine, Krüger-Gottschalk Antje, Nesterko Yuriy, Schäfer Ingo, Glaesmer Heide

机构信息

Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.

Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2025 Dec;16(1):2514878. doi: 10.1080/20008066.2025.2514878. Epub 2025 Jun 30.

Abstract

There is no universally optimal cutoff score for identifying probable PTSD, which makes reliable PTSD diagnosis challenging not only across different populations but also in different settings. Reliable outcomes require tailoring cutoff scores to the population, intended use (clinical, research, or prevalence estimation), and appropriate statistical methods to ensure their validity. While previously little emphasis has been placed on thorough methodological evaluation and purpose-driven cutoff selection, this work addresses these gaps by evaluating optimal PCL-5 cutoff scores for clinical use, prevalence estimation, and research in a German-speaking clinical sample. Previously published data from 443 trauma-exposed individuals in Germany were re-analyzed for this purpose. PTSD was assessed using the PCL-5 and with CAPS-5 clinical interview. Optimal cutoffs were identified using ROC analysis, applying standard estimation methods and prioritising diagnostic utility based on specific objectives. After evaluating various cutoff points for different purposes, we identified the following as most suitable for this sample: a cutoff of 34 for clinical use (sensitivity: 0.892, specificity: 0.645, PPV: 0.824, NPV: 0.763); 38 for prevalence estimation (sensitivity: 0.840, specificity: 0.703, PPV: 0.840, NPV: 0.703); and 42 or 43 for identifying clear-cut cases in research or resource-limited settings (sensitivity: 0.774-0.760, specificity: 0.742-0.761, PPV: 0.848-0.855, NPV: 0.639-0.631). The originally intended cutoffs of 31-33 yielded acceptable to excellent diagnostic utility parameters but were not identified as optimal for any specific purpose. This study highlights the variability in optimal PCL-5 cutoffs, linking selection to specific clinical or research aims. It provides validated cutoffs for PTSD prevalence in a German clinical sample, with limitations regarding generalizability to lower-prevalence populations. Future research should refine cutoffs for diverse populations and improve diagnostic precision.

摘要

对于识别可能的创伤后应激障碍(PTSD),不存在普遍适用的最佳临界分数,这使得可靠的PTSD诊断不仅在不同人群中具有挑战性,在不同环境中也是如此。可靠的结果需要根据人群、预期用途(临床、研究或患病率估计)调整临界分数,并采用适当的统计方法以确保其有效性。虽然此前很少强调进行全面的方法学评估和基于目的的临界值选择,但这项工作通过评估德语临床样本中用于临床、患病率估计和研究的最佳PCL-5临界分数,填补了这些空白。为此,重新分析了德国443名遭受创伤个体先前发表的数据。使用PCL-5和CAPS-5临床访谈评估PTSD。使用ROC分析、应用标准估计方法并根据特定目标优先考虑诊断效用,确定最佳临界值。在评估了不同目的的各种临界值后,我们确定以下临界值最适合该样本:临床使用的临界值为34(敏感性:0.892,特异性:0.645,阳性预测值:0.824,阴性预测值:0.763);患病率估计的临界值为38(敏感性:0.840,特异性:0.703,阳性预测值:0.840,阴性预测值:0.703);在研究或资源有限的环境中识别明确病例的临界值为42或43(敏感性:0.774 - 0.760,特异性:0.742 - 0.761,阳性预测值:0.848 - 0.855,阴性预测值:0.639 - 0.631)。最初设定的31 - 33的临界值产生了可接受至优秀的诊断效用参数,但未被确定为适用于任何特定目的的最佳临界值。本研究强调了PCL-5最佳临界值的变异性,将选择与特定的临床或研究目标联系起来。它为德国临床样本中的PTSD患病率提供了经过验证的临界值,但在推广到低患病率人群方面存在局限性。未来的研究应完善不同人群的临界值并提高诊断精度。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8229/12210402/abb3c7b37b60/ZEPT_A_2514878_F0001_OB.jpg

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