Internal consistency and factor structure of a brief scale assessing sensitivity to blood, injury, and mutilation.

Oscar I Gonzalez, James A Naifeh, Quinn M Biggs, Tsz Hin Hinz Ng, Carol S Fullerton, Robert J Ursano

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Oscar I GonzalezCenter for the Study of Traumatic Stress, Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.

James A NaifehCenter for the Study of Traumatic Stress, Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.

Quinn M BiggsCenter for the Study of Traumatic Stress, Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.

Tsz Hin Hinz NgCenter for the Study of Traumatic Stress, Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.

Carol S FullertonCenter for the Study of Traumatic Stress, Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.

Robert J UrsanoCenter for the Study of Traumatic Stress, Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA. robert.ursano@usuhs.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1861-9173

Funding

U.S. Department of Defense HT9404-13-1-0007

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveUS Army soldiers and military veterans experience high rates of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, PTSD risk factors are not fully understood. Sensitivity to blood, injury, and mutilation (SBIM), which includes fear of being injured, seeing another person injured, and exposure to mutilation-relevant stimuli (e.g., blood, wounds) may be a PTSD risk factor that is identifiable prior to trauma exposure. Building on previous research that used a subset of items from the Mutilation Questionnaire (MQ), the aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of two brief scales assessing SBIM.

resultsData from two independent samples of male, US Army soldiers, was utilized to examine a brief 10-item SBIM measure (MQ-SBIM-10) and a shorter version 5-item SBIM measure (MQ-SBIM-5). Internal consistency was indexed by the Kuder-Richardson 20 formula. Construct validity was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis and results obtained from each sample, and from a combined sample. The MQ-SBIM-10 demonstrated acceptable internal consistency and the hypothesized one-factor structure. Although the MQ-SBIM-5 explained a substantial amount of the variance in the 10-item measure and had a one-factor structure, internal consistency of the 5-item measure was poor. Analyses supported the MQ-SBIM-10 as a reliable and cohesive measure of sensitivity to blood, injury, and mutilation.

Indexed as

BloodMilitary PersonnelSocial PerceptionAdultAnxietyCross-Sectional StudiesEmotionsFactor Analysis, StatisticalHumansMalePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsVisual PerceptionWounds and InjuriesYoung AdultAssessmentMental healthMutilation Questionnaire (MQ)Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)Risk factorSensitivity to blood, injury and mutilation (SBIM)Soldiers

Identifiers

PMID30909956

DOI10.1186/s13104-019-4200-9

PMCPMC6434799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.