UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

Evidence for the coherence and integrity of the complex PTSD (CPTSD) diagnosis: response to Achterhof et al., (2019) and Ford (2020)

Cloitre, M; Brewin, CR; Bisson, JI; Hyland, P; Karatzias, T; Lueger-Schuster, B; Maercker, A; ... Shevlin, M; + view all (2020) Evidence for the coherence and integrity of the complex PTSD (CPTSD) diagnosis: response to Achterhof et al., (2019) and Ford (2020). European Journal of Psychotraumatology , 11 (1) , Article 1739873. 10.1080/20008198.2020.1739873. Green open access

[img]
Preview
Text
Cloitre et al 2020 response to Achterhof et al 2019 and Ford 2020.pdf - Published version

Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

This letter to the editor responds to a recent EJPT editorial and following commentary which express concerns about the validity of the ICD-11 complex PTSD (CPTSD) diagnosis. Achterhof and colleagues caution that latent profile analyses and latent class analyses, which have been frequently used to demonstrate the discriminative validity of the ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD constructs, have limitations and cannot be relied on to definitively determine the validity of the diagnosis. Ford takes a broader perspective and introduces the concept of ‘cPTSD’ which describes a wide ranging set of symptoms identified from studies related to DSM-IV, DSM-V and ICD-11 and proposes that the validity of the ICD-11 CPTSD is in question as it does not address the multiple symptoms identified from previous trauma-related disorders. We argue that ICD-11 CPTSD is a theory-driven, empirically supported construct that has internal consistency and conceptual coherence and that it need not explain nor resolve the inconsistencies of past formulations to demonstrate its validity. We do agree with Ford and with Achterhof and colleagues that no one single statistical process can definitively answer the question of whether CPTSD is a valid construct. We reference several studies utilizing many different statistical approaches implemented across several countries, the overwhelming majority of which have supported the validity of ICD-11 as a unique construct. We conclude with our own cautions about ICD-11 CPTSD research to date and identify important next steps.

Type: Article
Title: Evidence for the coherence and integrity of the complex PTSD (CPTSD) diagnosis: response to Achterhof et al., (2019) and Ford (2020)
Open access status: An open access version is available from UCL Discovery
DOI: 10.1080/20008198.2020.1739873
Publisher version: http://doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2020.1739873
Language: English
Additional information: This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Keywords: Social Sciences, Science & Technology, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, Psychology, Clinical, Psychiatry, Psychology, ICD-11, complex PTSD, CPTSD, POSTTRAUMATIC-STRESS-DISORDER, ICD-11 PTSD, ADOLESCENTS, TRAUMA
UCL classification: UCL
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences > Div of Psychology and Lang Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences > Div of Psychology and Lang Sciences > Clinical, Edu and Hlth Psychology
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10095167
Downloads since deposit
10Downloads
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item