2018
DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e338
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Brief Screening Tool for PTSD: Validation of the Korean Version of the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (K-PC-PTSD-5)

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate psychometrically the Korean version of the Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Screen for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-fifth edition (K-PC-PTSD-5). In total, 252 participants were interviewed with the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-fifth edition-research version (SCID-5-RV). The K-PC-PTSD-5 showed good internal consistency (α = 0.872), test-retest reliability (r = 0.89), and concurrent validity (r = 0.81)… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
25
0
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
2
25
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…For PTSD we used Primary Care- Post traumatic Stress disorder (PC- PTSD) for Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM) V—those who responded positively to 3 out of 5 questions about how the traumatic event(s) had affected them over the past month was regarded as probable PTSD ( 24 ). Though this has not been validated in a Kenyan context it has been shown to have high diagnostic accuracy and is highly acceptable due to its simplicity and brevity- having only five questions ( 25 ) and has shown good reliability even outside the US setting, as is the case of the Korean validation ( 26 ). We used the term Probable PTSD because to make a diagnosis of PTSD we would need a more comprehensive assessment by a clinician.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For PTSD we used Primary Care- Post traumatic Stress disorder (PC- PTSD) for Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM) V—those who responded positively to 3 out of 5 questions about how the traumatic event(s) had affected them over the past month was regarded as probable PTSD ( 24 ). Though this has not been validated in a Kenyan context it has been shown to have high diagnostic accuracy and is highly acceptable due to its simplicity and brevity- having only five questions ( 25 ) and has shown good reliability even outside the US setting, as is the case of the Korean validation ( 26 ). We used the term Probable PTSD because to make a diagnosis of PTSD we would need a more comprehensive assessment by a clinician.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…AUC for the PC-PTSD-5 was 0.94 and the optimally sensitive cut-off score was 3 (sensitivity = 0.95; specificity = 0.85; see Table 2 ). The PC-PTSD-5 has also been validated in a Korean population of clinical and nonclinical participants [ 89 ]. The Korean version showed good internal consistency (α = 0.87) and a cut-off score of 3 resulted in optimal psychometrics (AUC = 0.90; sensitivity = 0.91; specificity = 0.78) [ 89 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The PC-PTSD-5 has also been validated in a Korean population of clinical and nonclinical participants [89]. The Korean version showed good internal consistency (α = 0.87) and a cut-off score of 3 resulted in optimal psychometrics (AUC = 0.90; sensitivity = 0.91; specificity = 0.78) [89]. The PC-PTSD-5 appears to be a psychometrically-sound screening questionnaire for PTSD [78] The Short-Form PCL-5 is a 4-item screening questionnaire created by taking items from the original 20-item PCL-5 [16].…”
Section: Panic Disorder Screener (Padis)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PC-PTSD has showed good internal consistency (α = .87), test-retest reliability ( r = 0.89), and concurrent validity ( r = 0.81). 19 Participants’ results were considered “positive” for a PTSD diagnosis if they answered “Yes” to any 3 or more items. 18 The sensitivity and specificity of the PC-PTSD with a score of 3 and higher for diagnosing a case of PTSD are respectively 76% and 93% (ACP Depression Care Guide, 2014) and 85% and 82%.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%