Screening for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in Mozambique: Validation of the Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Screen for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual fifth edition (PC-PTSD-5).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: ), the PC-PTSD-5 in Mozambique. METHOD: This study recruited 957 participants who completed the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview-Plus (MINI-Plus) and PC-PTSD-5, a convenience sample from primary and tertiary care settings in Maputo, Mozambique. Participants were administered a diagnostic interview for psychiatric disorders and the PC-PTSD-5 screening tool. We evaluated the criterion validity of the PC-PTSD-5 concerning the MINI-Plus diagnosis of PTSD, the internal construct validity and reliability using confirmatory factor analysis and Kuder-Richardson 20 (KR-20), discriminant validity of the PC-PTSD-5 in comparison to other common mental disorder and suicide risk screening tools, and measurement invariance of selected cutoffs by age, sex, and comorbidity. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the PC-PTSD-5 was high (KR-20 = 0.837), and confirmatory factor analysis suggested that a single PTSD factor fits the data well. PC-PTSD-5 items were moderately correlated with other psychiatric symptoms. Criterion validity analyses revealed that a cutoff score of 3 provided high specificity (0.833) and moderate sensitivity (0.673). This cutoff score performed optimally across age and gender; however, a cutoff score of 2 was preferred if the participant had no psychiatric comorbidities. CONCLUSION: Screening with the PC-PTSD-5 may facilitate case detection and linkages to appropriate treatment for individuals affected by potentially traumatic events in Mozambique. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".