↓ Skip to main content

Predicting posttraumatic stress disorder in children and parents following accidental child injury: evaluation of the Screening Tool for Early Predictors of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (STEPP)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Predicting posttraumatic stress disorder in children and parents following accidental child injury: evaluation of the Screening Tool for Early Predictors of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (STEPP)
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0492-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Els PM van Meijel, Maj R Gigengack, Eva Verlinden, Brent C Opmeer, Hugo A Heij, J Carel Goslings, Frank W Bloemers, Jan SK Luitse, Frits Boer, Martha A Grootenhuis, Ramón JL Lindauer

Abstract

Children and their parents are at risk of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following injury due to pediatric accidental trauma. Screening could help predict those at greatest risk and provide an opportunity for monitoring so that early intervention may be provided. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Screening Tool for Early Predictors of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (STEPP) in a mixed-trauma sample in a non-English speaking country (the Netherlands). Children aged 8-18 and one of their parents were recruited in two academic level I trauma centers. The STEPP was assessed in 161 children (mean age 13.9 years) and 156 parents within one week of the accident. Three months later, clinical diagnoses and symptoms of PTSD were assessed in 147 children and 135 parents. We used the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for DSM-IV - Child and Parent version, the Children's Revised Impact of Event Scale and the Impact of Event Scale-Revised. Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses were performed to estimate the Areas Under the Curve as a measure of performance and to determine the optimal cut-off score in our sample. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated. The aim was to maximize both sensitivity and negative predictive values. PTSD was diagnosed in 12% of the children; 10% of their parents scored above the cut-off point for PTSD. At the originally recommended cut-off scores (4 for children, 3 for parents), the sensitivity in our sample was 41% for children and 54% for parents. Negative predictive values were 92% for both groups. Adjusting the cut-off scores to 2 improved sensitivity to 82% for children and 92% for parents, with negative predictive values of 92% and 96%, respectively. With adjusted cut-off scores, the STEPP performed well: 82% of the children and 92% of the parents with a subsequent positive diagnosis were identified correctly. Special attention in the screening procedure is required because of a high rate of false positives. The STEPP appears to be a valid and useful instrument that can be used in the Netherlands as a first screening method in stepped psychotrauma care following accidents.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 8 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 38%
Social Sciences 9 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 14 21%

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 12 May 2015.
All research outputs
#11,518,632
of 14,535,828 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#2,684
of 3,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,180
of 231,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,535,828 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 3,293 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 231,059 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them