ArticleDer Nervenarzt2019
[Diagnostics of posttraumatic stress disorder according to DSM-5 and ICD-11].
Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The role of post-trauma stress symptoms in the development of chronic musculoskeletal pain and disability: A systematic review.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2023Pooled it
- The prevalence of traumatic experiences and PTSD according to DSM-5 and ICD-11 in the German general population.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2025Article
- The German PCL-5: evaluating structural validity in a large-scale sample of the general German population.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2024Article
- A Latent Class Analysis on Symptoms of Prolonged Grief, Post-Traumatic Stress, and Depression Following the Loss of a Loved One.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11, Version 2018) differ with respect to the diagnostic criteria of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The present study investigated the implications of these differences for the classification of PTSD within a sample of German survivors of various traumatic events. PATIENTS AND
methodsA total of 341 trauma survivors who participated in a multicenter study were classified according to DSM-5 and ICD-11 and the results were compared. The PTSD checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) was used to diagnose PTSD. The ICD-11 PTSD cases were identified using a "restrictive" and a "wide" operationalization of re-experiencing symptoms (i. e. with and without intrusive memories). Depression and the level of trauma-related impairment were also assessed.
resultsThe diagnosis rate using ICD-11 was significantly lower than under DSM-5 (DSM-5 64.5%, ICD-11 54.0%, p < 0.001) using a restrictive operationalization of re-experiencing symptoms but differences disappeared when using a wide operationalization. Rates of comorbidity with depression were reduced under ICD-11. Individuals with high and low levels of trauma-related impairment were equally likely to receive a PTSD diagnosis under ICD-11. DISCUSSION: Differences in the diagnosis rates between ICD-11 and DSM-5 depend on the operationalization of the specific ICD-11 re-experiencing requirements. Precise diagnostic guidelines are necessary to avoid inconsistent diagnoses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30643956What 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.