A timely determination of the risk of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a prerequisite for efficient service delivery and prevention. We provide a risk estimate tool allowing a calculation of individuals' PTSD likelihood from early predictors. Members of the International Consortium to Predict PTSD (ICPP) shared individual participants' item-level data from ten longitudinal studies of civilian trauma survivors admitted to acute care centers in six countries. Eligible participants (N=2,473) completed an initial clinical assessment within 60 days of trauma exposure, and at least one follow-up assessment 4-15 months later. The Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-IV (CAPS) evaluated PTSD symptom severity and diagnostic status at each assessment. Participants' education, prior lifetime trauma exposure, marital status and socio-economic status were assessed and harmonized across studies. The study's main outcome was the likelihood of a follow-up PTSD given early predictors. The prevalence of follow-up PTSD was 11.8% (9.2% for male participants and 16.4% for females). A logistic model using early PTSD symptom severity (initial CAPS total score) as a predictor produced remarkably accurate estimates of . Adding respondents' female gender, lower education, and exposure to prior interpersonal trauma to the model yielded higher PTSD likelihood estimates, with similar model accuracy (predicted vs. raw probabilities: r=0.941). The current model could be adjusted for other traumatic circumstances and accommodate risk factors not captured by the ICPP (e.g., biological, social). In line with their use in general medicine, risk estimate models can inform clinical choices in psychiatry. It is hoped that quantifying individuals' PTSD risk will be a first step towards systematic prevention of the disorder.

BackgroundThe Great East Japan Earthquake of March 11, 2001 left around 20,000 dead or missing. Previous studies showed that rescue workers, as well as survivors, of disasters are at high risk for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This study examined the predictive usefulness of the Peritraumatic Distress Inventory (PDI) among rescue workers of Disaster Medical Assistance Teams (DMATs) deployed during the acute disaster phase of the Great East Japan Earthquake.Methodology/Principal FindingsIn this prospective observational study, the DMAT members recruited were assessed 1 month after the earthquake on the PDI and 4 months after the earthquake on the Impact of Event Scale-Revised to determine PTSD symptoms. The predictive value of the PDI at initial assessment for PTSD symptoms at the follow-up assessment was examined by univariate and multiple linear regression analysis. Of the 254 rescue workers who participated in the initial assessment, 173 completed the follow-up assessment. Univariate regression analysis revealed that PDI total score and most individual item scores predicted PTSD symptoms. In particular, high predictive values were seen for peritraumatic emotional distress such as losing control of emotions and being ashamed of emotional reactions. In multiple linear regression analysis, PDI total score was an independent predictor for PTSD symptoms after adjusting for covariates. As for covariates specifically, watching earthquake television news reports for more than 4 hours per day predicted PTSD symptoms.Conclusions/SignificanceThe PDI predicted PTSD symptoms in rescue workers after the Great East Japan Earthquake. Peritraumatic emotional distress appears to be an important factor to screen for individuals at risk for developing PTSD among medical rescue workers. In addition, watching television for extended period of time might require attention at a time of crisis.

No abstract

ObjectivesA previous individual participant data meta‐analysis (IPDMA) identified differences in major depression classification rates between different diagnostic interviews, controlling for depressive symptoms on the basis of the Patient Health Questionnaire‐9. We aimed to determine whether similar results would be seen in a different population, using studies that administered the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in pregnancy or postpartum.MethodsData accrued for an EPDS diagnostic accuracy IPDMA were analysed. Binomial generalised linear mixed models were fit to compare depression classification odds for the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID), controlling for EPDS scores and participant characteristics.ResultsAmong fully structured interviews, the MINI (15 studies, 2,532 participants, 342 major depression cases) classified depression more often than the CIDI (3 studies, 2,948 participants, 194 major depression cases; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.21, 11.43]). Compared with the semistructured SCID (28 studies, 7,403 participants, 1,027 major depression cases), odds with the CIDI (interaction aOR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.85, 0.92]) and MINI (interaction aOR = 0.95, 95% CI [0.92, 0.99]) increased less as EPDS scores increased.ConclusionDifferent interviews may not classify major depression equivalently.