Public health

Reliability and Validity of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Peritraumatic Distress Index (CPDI)

  • Jing TAO ,
  • Qing-zhi ZENG ,
  • Jin DANG ,
  • Jian-yin QIU
Expand
  • 1.Psychological Counseling Clinic of Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200030, China
    2.Shanghai Center for Mental Disease Control and Prevention, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200030, China
QIU Jian-yin, E-mail: jianyin_qiu@163.com.

Online published: 2021-09-23

Supported by

"Star of Jiao Tong University" Program of Shanghai Jiao Tong University Combination of Medicine and Engineering Research Fund(YG2020YQ21)

Abstract

Objective

·To explore the reliability and validity of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Peritraumatic Distress Index (CPDI) in evaluating pandemic-related acute stress reaction.

Methods

·From 31 January 2020 to 29 February 2020, CPDI, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) and Self-reporting Questionnaire-20 (SRQ-20) were measured in 253 outpatients, their family members and medical staff of our hospital. At the same time, leveraging the Siuvo Intelligent Psychological Assessment Platform, we presented QR codes of the CPDI questionnaire online openly, accessible to the participants nationwide, and received a total of 75 867 valid responses. Cronbach's α coefficient was used to evaluate the internal consistency. The correlation between CPDI and PHQ-9, GAD-7 and SRQ-20 was used to test the criterion validity. Exploratory factor analysis was used to detect the structural validity and the cut-off score of the questionnaire to screen the psychological symptoms associated with COVID-19 was also detected.

Results

·The Cronbach's α of the 15-item questionnaire was 0.932. The correlation coefficients between the 15-item CPDI and PHQ-9, GAD-7 and SRQ-20 were 0. 670, 0.699 and 0.711 respectively (all P=0.000). The exploratory factor analysis results contained 15 items and 4 factors, the factor load was 0.491-0.681, and the cumulative variance interpretation rate was 72.006%. In terms of cut-off score, it was identified as suspicious symptom by cut-off score of 10/11 points. The sensitivity and specificity were 0.822 and 0.811, respectively. The cut-off score to confirm the presence of symptoms was 14/15 points. The sensitivity and specificity were 0.815 and 0.824, respectively.

Conclusion

·The study indicates that CPDI is with good internal consistency reliability, criterion validity and structural validity.

Cite this article

Jing TAO , Qing-zhi ZENG , Jin DANG , Jian-yin QIU . Reliability and Validity of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Peritraumatic Distress Index (CPDI)[J]. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Medical Science), 2021 , 41(10) : 1359 -1365 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8115.2021.10.014

References

1 Beusenberg M, Orley JH, Division of Mental Health, World Health Organization. A user's guide to the self reporting questionnaire (SRQ)[M]. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1994.
2 American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition, text revision[M]. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 2000.
3 徐勇,吴海苏,徐一峰. 病人健康问卷抑郁量表(PHQ-9)在社区老年人群中的应用: 信度与效度分析[J]. 上海精神医学,2007,19(5):257-259, 276.
4 胡星辰,张迎黎,梁炜,等. 病人健康问卷抑郁量表(PHQ-9)在青少年中应用的信效度检验[J]. 四川精神卫生,2014,27(4):357-360.
5 何筱衍,李春波,钱洁,等. 广泛性焦虑量表在综合性医院的信度和效度研究[J]. 上海精神医学,2010,22(4):200-203.
6 Emmelkamp PM. Specific and social phobias in ICD-11[J]. World Psychiatry, 2012, 11: 94-99.
7 Maercker A. EPA-0111-ICD-11: stress-related disorders[J]. European Psychiatry, 2014, 29:1.
8 邹莉玲, 余小金, 闵捷, 等. ROC曲线在医学诊断中的应用与进展[J]. 东南大学学报(医学版), 2003, 22(001):67-70.
Outlines

/