TY - JOUR
T1 - The differential diagnostic accuracy of the PTSD Checklist among men versus women in a community sample
AU - Parker-Guilbert, Kelly S.
AU - Leifker, Feea R.
AU - Sippel, Lauren M.
AU - Marshall, Amy D.
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr. Marshall is supported by the National Institutes of Health׳s Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women׳s Health (BIRCWH) program ( K12 HD055882 ). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. We thank Fiona Barwick, Kaitlyn Hanley, Lauren Szkodny, and numerous undergraduate research assistants for their helpful contributions to participant recruitment and data collection.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
PY - 2014/12/15
Y1 - 2014/12/15
N2 - We evaluated the specific version of the PTSD Checklist (PCL-S) as a screening tool for the recruitment of community-residing men and women with diverse trauma experiences. We administered the PCL-S via telephone in the context of participant recruitment, as well as in a laboratory setting preceding administration of the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS), the gold standard PTSD assessment tool. In the laboratory, the PCL-S performed reasonably well for men and women, yielding overall diagnostic efficiency (ODE) values (representing percentage of cases accurately identified) of 0.78 and 0.73, respectively, for our recommended cut-points of 42 for men and 49 for women. In contrast, as a recruitment tool, the PCL-S yielded an acceptable ODE of 0.79 for men at the recommended cut-point of 47, but only an ODE of 0.56 (representing diagnostic efficiency no greater than chance) for women at the recommended cut-point of 50. A recruitment cut-point of 57 for women yields a similarly modest ODE of 0.61, but with substantial cost to sensitivity. These findings suggest that use of the PCL-S to screen for PTSD among potential study participants may lead to gender biased study results, even when separate diagnostic cut-points for men and women are used.
AB - We evaluated the specific version of the PTSD Checklist (PCL-S) as a screening tool for the recruitment of community-residing men and women with diverse trauma experiences. We administered the PCL-S via telephone in the context of participant recruitment, as well as in a laboratory setting preceding administration of the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS), the gold standard PTSD assessment tool. In the laboratory, the PCL-S performed reasonably well for men and women, yielding overall diagnostic efficiency (ODE) values (representing percentage of cases accurately identified) of 0.78 and 0.73, respectively, for our recommended cut-points of 42 for men and 49 for women. In contrast, as a recruitment tool, the PCL-S yielded an acceptable ODE of 0.79 for men at the recommended cut-point of 47, but only an ODE of 0.56 (representing diagnostic efficiency no greater than chance) for women at the recommended cut-point of 50. A recruitment cut-point of 57 for women yields a similarly modest ODE of 0.61, but with substantial cost to sensitivity. These findings suggest that use of the PCL-S to screen for PTSD among potential study participants may lead to gender biased study results, even when separate diagnostic cut-points for men and women are used.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84908200300&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84908200300&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.08.001
DO - 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.08.001
M3 - Article
C2 - 25190345
AN - SCOPUS:84908200300
VL - 220
SP - 679
EP - 686
JO - Psychiatry Research
JF - Psychiatry Research
SN - 0165-1781
IS - 1-2
ER -