TY - JOUR
T1 - The differential diagnostic accuracy of the PTSD Checklist among men versus women in a community sample
AU - Parker-Guilbert, Kelly S.
AU - Leifker, Feea R.
AU - Sippel, Lauren M.
AU - Marshall, Amy D.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
PY - 2014/12/15
Y1 - 2014/12/15
N2 - We evaluated the specific version of the PTSD Checklist (PCL-S) as a screening tool for the recruitment of community-residing men and women with diverse trauma experiences. We administered the PCL-S via telephone in the context of participant recruitment, as well as in a laboratory setting preceding administration of the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS), the gold standard PTSD assessment tool. In the laboratory, the PCL-S performed reasonably well for men and women, yielding overall diagnostic efficiency (ODE) values (representing percentage of cases accurately identified) of 0.78 and 0.73, respectively, for our recommended cut-points of 42 for men and 49 for women. In contrast, as a recruitment tool, the PCL-S yielded an acceptable ODE of 0.79 for men at the recommended cut-point of 47, but only an ODE of 0.56 (representing diagnostic efficiency no greater than chance) for women at the recommended cut-point of 50. A recruitment cut-point of 57 for women yields a similarly modest ODE of 0.61, but with substantial cost to sensitivity. These findings suggest that use of the PCL-S to screen for PTSD among potential study participants may lead to gender biased study results, even when separate diagnostic cut-points for men and women are used.
AB - We evaluated the specific version of the PTSD Checklist (PCL-S) as a screening tool for the recruitment of community-residing men and women with diverse trauma experiences. We administered the PCL-S via telephone in the context of participant recruitment, as well as in a laboratory setting preceding administration of the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS), the gold standard PTSD assessment tool. In the laboratory, the PCL-S performed reasonably well for men and women, yielding overall diagnostic efficiency (ODE) values (representing percentage of cases accurately identified) of 0.78 and 0.73, respectively, for our recommended cut-points of 42 for men and 49 for women. In contrast, as a recruitment tool, the PCL-S yielded an acceptable ODE of 0.79 for men at the recommended cut-point of 47, but only an ODE of 0.56 (representing diagnostic efficiency no greater than chance) for women at the recommended cut-point of 50. A recruitment cut-point of 57 for women yields a similarly modest ODE of 0.61, but with substantial cost to sensitivity. These findings suggest that use of the PCL-S to screen for PTSD among potential study participants may lead to gender biased study results, even when separate diagnostic cut-points for men and women are used.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84908200300&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84908200300&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.08.001
DO - 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.08.001
M3 - Article
C2 - 25190345
AN - SCOPUS:84908200300
SN - 0165-1781
VL - 220
SP - 679
EP - 686
JO - Psychiatry Research
JF - Psychiatry Research
IS - 1-2
ER -