Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32341764›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of psychotraumatology2020

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

Marylène Cloitre, Chris R Brewin, Jonathan I Bisson, Philip Hyland, Thanos Karatzias, Brigitte Lueger-Schuster, Andreas Maercker, Neil P Roberts, Mark Shevlin

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of psychotraumatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. New research on validity and clinical utility of ICD-11 vs. ICD-10 and DSM-5 diagnostic categories.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Complex PTSD: what is the clinical utility of the diagnosis?European journal of psychotraumatology · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors.

Marylène CloitreNational Center for PTSD Dissemination and Training Division, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8029-1570
Chris R BrewinClinical Educational & Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
Jonathan I BissonSchool of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5170-1243
Philip HylandDepartment of Psychology, Maynooth University, Kildare, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-9574-7128
Thanos KaratziasNHS Lothian, Rivers Centre for Traumatic Stress, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3002-0630
Brigitte Lueger-SchusterUnit of Psychotraumatology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Andreas MaerckerDivision of Psychopathology and Clinical Intervention Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-6925-3266
Neil P RobertsPsychology and Psychological Therapies Directorate, Cardiff & Vale University Health Board, Cardiff, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6277-0102
Mark ShevlinSchool of Psychology, Ulster University, Derry, Northern Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-6262-5223

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

complex PTSDCPTSDICD-11

Identifiers

PMID32341764
PMCPMC7170304

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.