↓ Skip to main content

Changes in affect after completing a mailed survey about trauma: two pre- and post-test studies in former disability applicants for posttraumatic stress disorder

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Changes in affect after completing a mailed survey about trauma: two pre- and post-test studies in former disability applicants for posttraumatic stress disorder
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12874-017-0357-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maureen Murdoch, Shannon Marie Kehle-Forbes, Melissa Ruth Partin

Abstract

One potential concern with using mailed surveys containing trauma-related content is the possibility of re-traumatizing survivors without a trained mental health professional present. Prior research provides insufficient guidance regarding the prevalence and magnitude of this risk because the psychological harms of trauma-related surveys have typically been estimated using single post-test observations. Post-test observations cannot quantify magnitude of change in participants' emotional states and may over or under estimate associations between participants' characteristics (risk factors) and post-survey upset. We conducted two pre- and post-test studies in samples of former applicants for posttraumatic stress disorder disability benefits: 191 males who served during Gulf War I plus 639 male and 921 female Veterans who served sometime between 1955 and 1998. We used two 9-point items from the Self-Assessment Manikins to measure participants' valence (sadness/happiness) and arousal (tenseness/calmness) before and after they completed mailed surveys asking about trauma-related symptoms or experiences. We examined the following potential predictors for post-survey sadness and tenseness: screening positive for posttraumatic stress disorder, having a serious mental illness, and history of military sexual assault or combat. After the survey, across the groups, 29.3-41.8% were sadder, 45.3-52.2% had no change in valence, and 12.9-22.5% were happier; 31.7-40.2% were tenser, 40.6-48.2% had no change in arousal, and 17.3-24.0% were calmer. The mean increase in sadness or tenseness post-survey was less than one point in all groups (SD's < 1.7). Cohen's d ranged from 0.07 to 0.30. Most hypothesized predictors were associated with greater baseline sadness or tenseness, but not necessarily with larger post-survey changes. Women with a history of military sexual assault had the largest net post-survey changes in sadness (mean = 0.7, SD = 1.4) and tenseness (mean = 0.6, SD = 1.6). While a substantial minority of Veterans reported more sadness or tenseness post-survey, the net change in affect was small. Most hypothesized risk factors were actually associated with higher baseline sadness or tenseness scores. When receiving unsolicited, trauma-related surveys by mail, separate protections for Veterans with the risk factors studied here do not seem necessary.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 20%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 27 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Social Sciences 9 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 28 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 May 2017.
All research outputs
#18,547,867
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,751
of 2,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,843
of 310,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#28
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,027 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,780 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.