Shevlin, Mark; Hyland, Philip; Brewin, Chris R; Cloitre, Marylene; Karatzias, Thanos; Redican, Enya; (2025) Testing the Use of "Clinical Checks" With the International Trauma Questionnaire to Measure PTSD and Complex PTSD. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 10.1111/acps.13799. (In press).

Preview

Text Acta Psychiatr Scand - 2025 - Shevlin - Testing the Use of Clinical Checks With the International Trauma Questionnaire to.pdf - Published Version Download (245kB) | Preview

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) is the most widely used measure of ICD-11 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Complex PTSD (CPTSD). This self-report scale has been used to estimate prevalence rates of these disorders in general populations and clinical samples, but concerns abound that prevalence estimates derived from self-report measures are too high. To address this concern, we previously introduced the concept of adding "clinical checks" to self-report measures to ensure initial responses reflected the intended clinical meaning of the scale item. Here we provide a rationale for adding clinical checks to the ITQ, describe the process of developing them, and demonstrate their effect at the symptom, cluster, and disorder levels in a general population sample. METHODS: A team of researchers and clinicians, including those who developed the ITQ, developed clinical checks for all ITQ items. These were tested using data from a non-probability quota-based representative sample of adults from the United Kingdom (N = 975). RESULTS: Use of clinical checks led to decreases in symptom endorsements ranging from 18.0% to 43.9%, and symptom cluster requirements from 19.1% to 35.9%. Disorder prevalence estimates without the clinical checks were 5.4% for PTSD and 9.5% for CPTSD. With the clinical checks, prevalence estimates dropped to 3.8% for PTSD (relative decrease = 29.6%) and 4.9% for CPTSD (relative decrease = 48.4%). CONCLUSION: Clinical checks can be easily embedded into the ITQ and have a significant effect on prevalence estimates. We contextualize these results in relation to existing literature on population prevalence estimates derived from clinical interviews and discrepancies between clinical interviews and self-report measures.

Download activity - last month

Export as CSVXMLJSON

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as JSONXMLCSV

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as CSVXMLJSON

Archive Staff Only

View Item