| Sumario: | Objective: In trauma research, it is common for researchers to characterize participants as either "trauma exposed" or "not trauma exposed" regardless of nuanced differences of the potentially traumatic event (PTE). To our knowledge, no study has simultaneously examined differences across both PTEs and exposure types. Method: Using latent class analysis, we investigated latent homogeneous subgroups of individuals following experiences of 16 PTEs via three exposure types (i.e., direct, indirect, and/or occupational). We further examined class differences regarding posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom clusters, event centrality, depression, and anxiety. Our sample included 2,663 participants (Mage = 22.33; 56.0% female). Results: Results indicated four latent subgroups: (a) occupational trauma (OT), (b) direct interpersonal trauma (DIT), (c) indirect trauma (IT), and (d) low trauma exposure (LTE). Individuals in the OT class reported the highest levels of all symptoms except for PTSD avoidance and event centrality (which were highest in the DIT class), and individuals in the LTE class reported the lowest levels of all symptoms. Several nuanced between-class differences were found regarding posttrauma outcomes. Conclusions: Findings further support the notion that dichotomizing participants as "trauma exposed" or "not trauma exposed" is overly simplistic and ignores important variability in trauma research. Clinical Impact Statement: This study suggests that there are distinct subgroups of trauma-exposed individuals based on the specific potentially traumatic event and the way in which that event is experienced. Results suggest that trauma researchers should account for these nuanced differences when examining and treating trauma-exposed individuals.
|
|---|