Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35222840›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of psychotraumatology2022

Validation of the International Trauma Interview (ITI) for the Clinical Assessment of ICD-11 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Complex PTSD (CPTSD) in a Lithuanian Sample.

Odeta Gelezelyte, Neil P Roberts, Monika Kvedaraite, Jonathan I Bisson, Chris R Brewin, Marylene Cloitre, Agniete Kairyte, Thanos Karatzias, Mark Shevlin, Evaldas Kazlauskas

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of psychotraumatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.

Odeta GelezelyteCenter for Psychotraumatology, Institute of Psychology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0001-8501-3502
Neil P RobertsDivision of Psychological Medicine and Clinical Neurosciences, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6277-0102
Monika KvedaraiteCenter for Psychotraumatology, Institute of Psychology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0003-2339-8632
Jonathan I BissonDivision of Psychological Medicine and Clinical Neurosciences, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5170-1243
Chris R BrewinResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7462-4460
Marylene CloitreNational Center for PTSD Dissemination and Training Division, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8029-1570
Agniete KairyteCenter for Psychotraumatology, Institute of Psychology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0002-6888-2869
Thanos KaratziasSchool of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Scotland, UK & Nhs Lothian Rivers Centre for Traumatic Stress, Edinburgh, Scotland.ORCID 0000-0002-3002-0630
Mark ShevlinSchool of Psychology, Ulster University, Coleraine, Northern Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-6262-5223
Evaldas KazlauskasCenter for Psychotraumatology, Institute of Psychology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0002-6654-6220
Vilnius University · LTCardiff and Vale University Health Board · GBCardiff University · GBEdinburgh Napier University · GBNational Center for PTSD · USUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Ulster · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The 11 Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the ITI in a Lithuanian sample in relation to interrater agreement, latent structure, internal reliability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity. Method: In total, 103 adults with a history of various traumatic experiences participated in the study. The sample was predominantly female (83.5%), with a mean age of 32.64 years ( Results: Overall, based on the ITI, 18.4% of participants fulfilled diagnostic criteria for PTSD and 21.4% for CPTSD. A second-order two-factor CFA model of the ITI PTSD and disturbances in self-organization (DSO) symptoms demonstrated a good fit. The associations with various mental health indicators supported the convergent and discriminant validity of the ITI. The clinician-administered ITI and self-report ITQ had poor to moderate diagnostic agreement across different symptom clusters. Conclusion: The ITI is a reliable and valid tool for assessing and diagnosing ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD.

Indexed as

AdultEmotional RegulationFemaleHumansLithuaniaMaleReproducibility of ResultsStress Disorders, Post-TraumaticSurveys and Questionnairesassessmentcomplex posttraumatic stress disorderICD-11International Trauma Interviewposttraumatic stress disorder

Identifiers

PMID35222840
PMCPMC8881058
OpenAlexW4212854690

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.