Validation of the French Version of the Child Post-Traumatic Stress Reaction Index: Psychometric Properties in French Speaking School-Aged Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the reliable and valid Child Post-Traumatic Stress Reaction Index (CPTS-RI) is a widely used measure of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms in children, it has not been validated in French-speaking populations. The present study aims to assess the psychometric properties of the CPTS-RI in three samples of French-speaking school-children. METHODS: Data was obtained from three samples. Sample 1 was composed of 106 children (mean (SD) age = 11.7(0.7), 50% females) victims of an industrial disaster. Sample 2 was composed of 50 children (mean (SD) age = 10.8(2.6), 44% females) who had received an orthopaedic surgical procedure after an accident. Sample 3 was composed of 106 children (mean (SD) age = 11.7(2.2), 44% females) admitted to an emergency department after a road traffic accident. We tested internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha. We examined test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient. In order to assess the convergent validity of the French version of the CPTS-RI and the Clinician Administered PTS Scale-Child and Adolescent (CAPS-CA), spearman-correlation coefficient was computed. To verify the validity of the cut-off scores, a ROC curve was constructed which evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of each score compared to the diagnosis with the CAPS-CA. We also used principal components analysis with varimax rotation to study the structure of the French version of the CPTS-RI. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.87 for the French version of the CPTS-RI. Two-week test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient (n = 30) was 0.67. The French version of the CPTS-RI was well correlated with the CAPS-CA (r = 0.76, p < 0.001). Taking the CAPS-CA as the diagnostic reference, with a diagnostic cut-off of >24 for the CPTS-RI, the sensitivity and specificities were 100% and 62.6%, respectively. The French version of the CPTS-RI demonstrated a three-factor structure. CONCLUSIONS: The CPTS-RI is reliable and valid in French-speaking children.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".