The Peritraumatic Distress Inventory: A Proposed Measure of PTSD Criterion A2
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Meeting criterion A2 for the diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in DSM-IV requires that an individual have high levels of distress during or after the traumatic event. Because of the paucity of valid and reliable instruments for assessing such responses, the authors developed a 13-item self-report measure, the Peritraumatic Distress Inventory, to obtain a quantitative measure of the level of distress experienced during and immediately after a traumatic event. METHOD: The cross-sectional study group comprised 702 police officers and 301 matched nonpolice comparison subjects varying in ethnicity and gender who were exposed to a wide range of critical incidents. RESULTS: The Peritraumatic Distress Inventory was found to be internally consistent, with good test-retest reliability and good convergent and divergent validity. Even after controlling for peritraumatic dissociation and for general psychopathology, the authors found that Peritraumatic Distress Inventory scores correlated with two measures of posttraumatic stress symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The Peritraumatic Distress Inventory holds promise as a measure of PTSD criterion A2. Future studies should prospectively examine the ability of the Peritraumatic Distress Inventory to predict PTSD and its associated biological and cognitive correlates in other trauma-exposed groups.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it