Abstract
Background The CAPS is regarded as the “gold standard” in PTSD assessment. It is a structured interview that yields a categorical diagnosis of PTSD and also a measure of the severity of PTSD symptoms. Since a PTSD diagnosis in some settings could be connected to getting benefits, scoring inconsistencies may be more abundant with this rating scale as they not only reflect raters carelessness but intentional inaccurate reporting by the subject.
Objective The objective of the current effort was to derive rating consistency flags for the CAPS-IV.
Methods We deconstructed CAPS scoring instructions and anchors to identify potential scoring inconsistency flags. These inconsistency flags were reviewed and confirmed by expert raters. To test the ability of the flags to identify careless responses the flags were applied to Monte Carlo simulated data of 100,000 CAPS administrations.
Results Twelve flags were derived (presented in Table 1). Two flags applied to most of the 17 symptom items (Flag 1: Frequency=0 & Intensity>0 and Flag 2: Frequency>0 & Intensity=0). The remaining 10 flags pertained to individual items. Five flags were rated as “High” flags, representing very probably or definitely incorrect rating, one as medium, reflecting probably incorrect rating. Flags were raised for 95% of the Monte Carlo simulated CAPS administrations, 78% of the administrations had 4 or more flags and 60% 5 or more.
Conclusions Scoring consistency flags for the CAPS may be useful in the quest to improve reliability and validity of clinical trials. Modified flags are currently being developed to cover the CAPS-V. Further testing of flags using clinical trial data is planned to examine their potential impact on signal detection.
Competing Interest Statement
Jonathan Rabinowitz has received research grant(s) support and/or travel support and/or speaker fees and/or consultant fees from Janssen (J&J), Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Lundbeck, Roche, Abraham Pharmaceuticals, Pierre Fabre, Intra-cellular Therapies, Minerva, Takeda and Amgen. Alon A. Rabinowitz and Sara Freedman have no disclosures.
Funding Statement
The research leading to these results has received support from the Elie Wiesel Chair at Bar Ilan University.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.
