Reliability of reports of childhood trauma in bipolar disorder: A test–retest study over 18 months
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to explore the reliability of self-reported trauma histories in a population with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. Previous studies in other populations suggest high reliability of trauma histories over time, and it was postulated that a similar high reliability would be demonstrated in this population. A total of 39 patients with a confirmed diagnosis (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, criteria) were followed up and readministered the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire after 18 months. Cohen's kappa scores and intraclass correlations suggested reasonable test-retest reliability over the 18-month time period of the study for all types of childhood abuse, namely, emotional, physical, and sexual abuse and physical and emotional neglect. Intraclass correlations ranged from r = .50 (sexual abuse) to r = .96 (physical abuse). Cohen's kappas ranged from .44 (sexual abuse) to .76 (physical abuse). Retrospective reports of childhood trauma can be seen as reliable and are in keeping with results found with other mental health populations.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".