The 6-Month Prevalence of Posttraumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSS) among Older Adults: Validity and Reliability of the PTSS Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To document the 6-month prevalence of posttraumatic stress syndrome (PTSS) in the older adult population and the validity of a PTSS Scale in an epidemiologic setting. METHOD: Data came from the Enquête sur la santé des aînés et l'utilisation des services de santé (ESA Services Study) conducted during 2012-2013 using a probability sample of older adults seeking medical services in primary health clinics. RESULTS: Results showed that a first-order PTSS measurement model consisting of 3 indicators-the number of lifetime traumatic events, the frequency of reactions and symptoms of distress associated with the traumatic events, and the presence of consequences on the social functioning-was plausible. Reliability of the PTSS was 0.82. According to the PTSS, 11.1% of the older adult patients presented with PTSS, but only 21.7% of them reported an impact of their symptoms on their social functioning. The prevalence of older adults meeting the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, criteria for full posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) reached 1.8%, and 1.8% of older adults reached criteria for partial PTSD. Our results also showed that women were more at risk to report PTSS than men and that older adults aged 75 years and older were less likely to report these symptoms than those aged between 65 and 74 years. CONCLUSIONS: PTSS is a common mental health problem among adults aged 65 and older and seeking health services in the general medical sector.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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 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".