↓ Skip to main content

Comparing three diagnostic algorithms of posttraumatic stress in young children exposed to accidental trauma: an exploratory study

Overview of attention for article published in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Comparing three diagnostic algorithms of posttraumatic stress in young children exposed to accidental trauma: an exploratory study
Published in
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13034-015-0046-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maj R. Gigengack, Els P. M. van Meijel, Eva Alisic, Ramón J. L. Lindauer

Abstract

Both the DSM-5 algorithm for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children 6 years and younger and Scheeringa's alternative PTSD algorithm (PTSD-AA) aim to be more developmentally sensitive for young children than the DSM-IV PTSD algorithm. However, very few studies compared the three algorithms simultaneously. The current study explores diagnostic outcomes of the three algorithms in young child survivors of accidental trauma. Parents of 98 young children (0-7 years) involved in an accident between 2006 and 2012 participated in a semi-structured telephone interview. Child posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) were measured with the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for DSM-IV-Child Version (ADIS-C/P), complemented with items from the Diagnostic Infant and Preschool Assessment (DIPA). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the characteristics of the children, accident related information and PTS symptoms. We compared the three PTSD algorithms in order to explore the diagnostic outcomes. A total of 9 of the children (9.2 %) showed substantial PTSS. Of these children 2 met the criteria of all three algorithms, 7 met both the DSM-5 subtype for children 6 years and younger and the PTSD-AA algorithm, and 2 did not fully meet any of the algorithms (subsyndromal PTSD). For young children, the DSM-5 subtype for children 6 years and younger and the PTSD-AA algorithm appear to be better suited than the previous DSM-IV algorithm. It remains important that clinicians pay attention to children with subsyndromal PTSD.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 20%
Student > Master 6 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 17%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 2 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 53%
Social Sciences 5 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Engineering 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 September 2016.
All research outputs
#8,769,389
of 14,535,828 outputs
Outputs from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
#316
of 460 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,266
of 231,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,535,828 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 460 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 231,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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