Comparison of two widely used PTSD-screening instruments: Implications for public mental health planning
dc.contributor.author | Ruggiero, Kenneth J. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Rheingold, Alyssa A. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Resnick, Heidi S. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Kilpatrick, Dean G. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Galea, Sandro | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2007-09-20T17:44:56Z | |
dc.date.available | 2008-01-03T16:20:09Z | en_US |
dc.date.issued | 2006-10 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Ruggiero, Kenneth J.; Rheingold, Alyssa A.; Resnick, Heidi S.; Kilpatrick, Dean G.; Galea, Sandro (2006). "Comparison of two widely used PTSD-screening instruments: Implications for public mental health planning." Journal of Traumatic Stress 19(5): 699-707. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/55842> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0894-9867 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1573-6598 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/55842 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=17075907&dopt=citation | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | Epidemiological research serves a critical role in public mental health planning in the aftermath of disasters, particularly via estimation of the mental health burden and potential needs of affected communities. However, different measures are used across studies to assess mental health response, making cross-study comparison difficult. The National Women's Study Posttraumatic Stress Disorder module (NWS-PTSD) and PTSD Checklist (PCL) have been among the most widely used measures of PTSD in postdisaster research. Here, the authors used a sample of 233 New York City-area residents who were administered both the NWS-PTSD and PCL 4 months after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The PCL yielded higher prevalence estimates at the symptom, cluster, and diagnostic levels. Implications for the interpretation of epidemiological data are discussed. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 124783 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 3118 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.publisher | Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Psychology | en_US |
dc.title | Comparison of two widely used PTSD-screening instruments: Implications for public mental health planning | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.rights.robots | IndexNoFollow | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Medicine (General) | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC ; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, National Crime Victims Research and Treatment Center, Medical University of South Carolina, P.O. Box 250852, 165 Cannon Street, Charleston, SC 29425 | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 17075907 | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/55842/1/20141_ftp.pdf | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jts.20141 | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Journal of Traumatic Stress | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.