SynthesisJAMA2015
Does This Patient Have Posttraumatic Stress Disorder?: Rational Clinical Examination Systematic Review.
Synthesis in JAMA, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 47 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
47 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prevalence, Detection and Correlates of PTSD in the Primary Care Setting: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2016Pooled it
- Management of Mental Health Disorders, Substance Use Disorders, and Suicide in Adults with Spinal Cord Injury: Clinical Practice Guideline for Healthcare Providers.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitationGuideline
- Clinical Predictors of Engagement in Teleintegrated Care and Telereferral Care for Complex Psychiatric Disorders in Primary Care: a Randomized Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Trial
- Childhood maltreatment and psychopathology during collective trauma: the longitudinal role of betrayal-related moral injury.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2026Article
- Article
- Post-Traumatic Stress, depression and anxiety symptoms among childhood cancer survivors and their parents.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Intrusive Traumatic Re-Experiencing Domain: Functional Connectivity Feature Classification by the ENIGMA PTSD Consortium.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2024Article
- Post-COVID-19 condition in pregnant and postpartum women: a long-term follow-up, observational prospective study.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Age-related impairment in fear memory extinction is restored by ketamine in middle-aged mice.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2023Article
- A 16-month longitudinal investigation of risk and protective factors for mental health outcomes throughout three national lockdowns and a mass vaccination campaign: Evidence from a weighted Israeli sample during COVID-19.Psychiatry research · 2023Article
- Impact of a Psychiatric Consultation Program on COVID-19 Patients: An Experimental Study.Psychiatry investigation · 2023Article
- Risk and protective factors for posttraumatic stress disorder in trauma-exposed individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic - findings from a pan-European study.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2022Article
- The emotional-behavioral state of Israeli adolescent and young adult females with anorexia nervosa during the COVID19 pandemic.Journal of eating disorders · 2022Article
- Mental Health Response to Disasters: Is There a Role for a Primary Care-Based Clinician?Prehospital and disaster medicine · 2022Article
- Development and pilot testing of a five item traumatic stress screener for use with adolescents in pediatric primary care.Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health · 2022Article
- Two Years of COVID-19 in Austria-Exploratory Longitudinal Study of Mental Health Outcomes and Coping Behaviors in the General Population.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Stimulant use for self-management of pain among safety-net patients with chronic non-cancer pain.Substance abuse · 2022Article
- Sleep Difficulties Among COVID-19 Frontline Healthcare Workers.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- Left alone outside: A prospective observational cohort study on mental health outcomes among relatives of COVID-19 hospitalized patients.Psychiatry research · 2022Observational
- An orchestrating role of mitochondria in the origin and development of post-traumatic stress disorder.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
importancePosttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a relatively common mental health condition frequently seen, though often unrecognized, in primary care settings. Identifying and treating PTSD can greatly improve patient health and well-being.
objectiveTo systematically review the utility of self-report screening instruments for PTSD among primary care and high-risk populations. EVIDENCE REVIEW: We searched MEDLINE and the National Center for PTSD's Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress (PILOTS) databases for articles published on screening instruments for PTSD published from January 1981 through March 2015. Study quality was rated using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) criteria. STUDY SELECTION: Studies of screening instruments for PTSD evaluated using gold standard structured clinical diagnostic interviews that had interview samples of at least 50 individuals.
findingsWe identified 2522 citations, retrieved 318 for further review, and retained 23 cohort studies that evaluated 15 screening instruments for PTSD. Of the 23 studies, 15 were conducted in primary care settings in the United States (n = 14,707 were screened, n = 5374 given diagnostic interview, n = 814 had PTSD) and 8 were conducted in community settings following probable trauma exposure (ie, natural disaster, terrorism, and military deployment; n = 5302 were screened, n = 4263 given diagnostic interview, n = 393 were known to have PTSD with an additional 50 inferred by rates reported by authors). Two screens, the Primary Care PTSD Screen (PC-PTSD) and the PTSD Checklist were the best performing instruments. The 4-item PC-PTSD has a positive likelihood ratio of 6.9 (95% CI, 5.5-8.8) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.30 (95% CI, 0.21-0.44) using the same score indicating a positive screen as used by the Department of Veterans Affairs in all of its primary care clinics. The 17-item PTSD Checklist has a positive likelihood ratio of 5.2 (95% CI, 3.6-7.5) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.33 (95% CI, 0.29-0.37) using scores of around 40 as indicating a positive screen. Using the same score employed by primary care clinics in the Department of Veterans Affairs to indicate a positive screen, the 4-item PC-PTSD has a sensitivity of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.55-0.81), a specificity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.86-0.95), a positive likelihood ratio of 8.49 (95% CI, 5.56-12.96) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.34 (95% CI, 0.22-0.48). For the 17-item PTSD Checklist, scores around 40 as indicating a positive screen, have a sensitivity of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.64-0.77), a specificity of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.84-0.93), a positive likelihood ratio of 6.8 (95% CI, 4.7-9.9) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.33 (95% CI, 0.27-0.40). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Two screening instruments, the PC-PTSD and the PTSD Checklist, show reasonable performance characteristics for use in primary care clinics or in community settings with high-risk populations. Both are easy to administer and interpret and can readily be incorporated into a busy practice setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26241601What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.