A systematic literature review of PTSD's latent structure in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV to DSM-5

Cherie Armour, Jana Műllerová, Jon D. Elhai

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

93 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The factor structure of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been widely researched, but consensus regarding the exact number and nature of factors is yet to be reached. The aim of the current study was to systematically review the extant literature on PTSD's latent structure in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) in order to identify the best-fitting model. One hundred and twelve research papers published after 1994 using confirmatory factor analysis and DSM-based measures of PTSD were included in the review. In the DSM-IV literature, four-factor models received substantial support, but the five-factor Dysphoric arousal model demonstrated the best fit, regardless of gender, measurement instrument or trauma type. The recently proposed DSM-5 PTSD model was found to be a good representation of PTSD's latent structure, but studies analysing the six- and seven-factor models suggest that the DSM-5 PTSD factor structure may need further alterations.
LanguageEnglish
Pages60-74
Number of pages15
JournalClinical Psychology Review
Volume44
Early online date18 Dec 2015
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 31 Mar 2016

Fingerprint

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorders
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Arousal
Statistical Factor Analysis
Consensus
Wounds and Injuries
Research

Keywords

  • Posttraumatic stress disorder
  • Systematic review
  • Confirmatory factor analysis
  • DSM

Cite this

@article{78c510fe36ba466abe3f851e62f639a0,
title = "A systematic literature review of PTSD's latent structure in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV to DSM-5",
abstract = "The factor structure of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been widely researched, but consensus regarding the exact number and nature of factors is yet to be reached. The aim of the current study was to systematically review the extant literature on PTSD's latent structure in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) in order to identify the best-fitting model. One hundred and twelve research papers published after 1994 using confirmatory factor analysis and DSM-based measures of PTSD were included in the review. In the DSM-IV literature, four-factor models received substantial support, but the five-factor Dysphoric arousal model demonstrated the best fit, regardless of gender, measurement instrument or trauma type. The recently proposed DSM-5 PTSD model was found to be a good representation of PTSD's latent structure, but studies analysing the six- and seven-factor models suggest that the DSM-5 PTSD factor structure may need further alterations.",
keywords = "Posttraumatic stress disorder, Systematic review, Confirmatory factor analysis, DSM",
author = "Cherie Armour and Jana Műllerov{\'a} and Elhai, {Jon D.}",
note = "n/a prior to Apr 2016",
year = "2016",
month = "3",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1016/j.cpr.2015.12.003",
language = "English",
volume = "44",
pages = "60--74",
journal = "Clinical Psychology Review",
issn = "0272-7358",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

A systematic literature review of PTSD's latent structure in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV to DSM-5. / Armour, Cherie; Műllerová, Jana; Elhai, Jon D.

In: Clinical Psychology Review, Vol. 44, 31.03.2016, p. 60-74.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A systematic literature review of PTSD's latent structure in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV to DSM-5

AU - Armour, Cherie

AU - Műllerová, Jana

AU - Elhai, Jon D.

N1 - n/a prior to Apr 2016

PY - 2016/3/31

Y1 - 2016/3/31

N2 - The factor structure of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been widely researched, but consensus regarding the exact number and nature of factors is yet to be reached. The aim of the current study was to systematically review the extant literature on PTSD's latent structure in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) in order to identify the best-fitting model. One hundred and twelve research papers published after 1994 using confirmatory factor analysis and DSM-based measures of PTSD were included in the review. In the DSM-IV literature, four-factor models received substantial support, but the five-factor Dysphoric arousal model demonstrated the best fit, regardless of gender, measurement instrument or trauma type. The recently proposed DSM-5 PTSD model was found to be a good representation of PTSD's latent structure, but studies analysing the six- and seven-factor models suggest that the DSM-5 PTSD factor structure may need further alterations.

AB - The factor structure of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been widely researched, but consensus regarding the exact number and nature of factors is yet to be reached. The aim of the current study was to systematically review the extant literature on PTSD's latent structure in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) in order to identify the best-fitting model. One hundred and twelve research papers published after 1994 using confirmatory factor analysis and DSM-based measures of PTSD were included in the review. In the DSM-IV literature, four-factor models received substantial support, but the five-factor Dysphoric arousal model demonstrated the best fit, regardless of gender, measurement instrument or trauma type. The recently proposed DSM-5 PTSD model was found to be a good representation of PTSD's latent structure, but studies analysing the six- and seven-factor models suggest that the DSM-5 PTSD factor structure may need further alterations.

KW - Posttraumatic stress disorder

KW - Systematic review

KW - Confirmatory factor analysis

KW - DSM

UR - https://pure.ulster.ac.uk/en/publications/a-systematic-literature-review-of-ptsds-latent-structure-in-the-d-4

U2 - 10.1016/j.cpr.2015.12.003

DO - 10.1016/j.cpr.2015.12.003

M3 - Article

VL - 44

SP - 60

EP - 74

JO - Clinical Psychology Review

T2 - Clinical Psychology Review

JF - Clinical Psychology Review

SN - 0272-7358

ER -