New findings questioning the construct validity of complex posttraumatic stress disorder (cPTSD): let’s take a closer look

This commentary provides a broader context for interpreting evidence from Latent Class and Latent Profile analyses on complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) that was provided in a recent contribution to the European Journal of Psychotraumatology. These data analytic strategies are not alone sufficient to test the construct validity of CPTSD. They base their conclusion on the empirical finding of substantial variation in latent models obtained with different analytic procedures and interpretations of the fit of different latent models, as well as interesting additional evidence of dispersion when individual patients’ symptom counts and symptom severity scores on PTSD and CPTSD are examined. However, the results of their analyses actually do provide support for one feature of construct validity, demonstrating discriminant validity by showing a consistent differentiation between PTSD and CPTSD (with expectable variation in both PTSD and CPTSD severity level by persons). Even in a sample of patients diagnosed with PTSD, there may be a Disorders of Self Organization (DSO) sub-group with low PTSD symptom severity. More detailed examination of which DSO symptoms and sub-domains characterize the DSO sub-group and the CPTSD sub-group is needed in order to clarify the nature of the DSO/CPTSD construct. Other analyses needed to fully test construct validity also are described.