↓ Skip to main content

The German version of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5): psychometric properties and diagnostic utility

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
194 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
202 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
The German version of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5): psychometric properties and diagnostic utility
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12888-017-1541-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antje Krüger-Gottschalk, Christine Knaevelsrud, Heinrich Rau, Anne Dyer, Ingo Schäfer, Julia Schellong, Thomas Ehring

Abstract

The Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist (PCL, now PCL-5) has recently been revised to reflect the new diagnostic criteria of the disorder. A clinical sample of trauma-exposed individuals (N = 352) was assessed with the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) and the PCL-5. Internal consistencies and test-retest reliability were computed. To investigate diagnostic accuracy, we calculated receiver operating curves. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were performed to analyze the structural validity. Results showed high internal consistency (α = .95), high test-retest reliability (r = .91) and a high correlation with the total severity score of the CAPS-5, r = .77. In addition, the recommended cutoff of 33 on the PCL-5 showed high diagnostic accuracy when compared to the diagnosis established by the CAPS-5. CFAs comparing the DSM-5 model with alternative models (the three-factor solution, the dysphoria, anhedonia, externalizing behavior and hybrid model) to account for the structural validity of the PCL-5 remained inconclusive. Overall, the findings show that the German PCL-5 is a reliable instrument with good diagnostic accuracy. However, more research evaluating the underlying factor structure is needed.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 202 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 202 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 15%
Student > Bachelor 30 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 12%
Researcher 18 9%
Other 11 5%
Other 24 12%
Unknown 63 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 82 41%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 5%
Neuroscience 9 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 4%
Computer Science 4 2%
Other 15 7%
Unknown 74 37%