5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Defining and Assessing the Syndrome of Moral Injury: Initial Findings of the Moral Injury Outcome Scale Consortium

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) entail acts of commission (e.g., cruelty, proscribed or prescribed violence) or omission (e.g., high stakes failure to protect others) and bearing witness (e.g., to grave inhumanity, to the gruesome aftermath of violence), or being the victim of others' acts of commission (e.g., high stakes trust violations) or omission (e.g., being the victim of grave individual or systemic failures to protect) that transgress deeply held beliefs and expectations about right and wrong. Although there is a proliferation of interest in moral injury (the outcome associated with exposure to PMIEs), there has been no operational definition of the putative syndrome and no standard assessment scheme or measure, which has hampered research and care in this area. We describe an international effort to define the syndrome of moral injury and develop and validate the Moral Injury Outcome Scale (MIOS) in three stages. To ensure content validity, in Stage I, we conducted interviews with service members, Veterans, and clinicians/Chaplains in each country, inquiring about the lasting impact of PMIEs. Qualitative analysis yielded six operational definitions of domains of impact of PMIEs and components within domains that establish the parameters of the moral injury syndrome. From the domain definitions, we derived an initial pool of scale items. Stage II entailed scale refinement using factor analytic methods, cross-national invariance testing, and internal consistency reliability analyses of an initial 34-item MIOS. A 14-item MIOS was invariant and reliable across countries and had two factors: Shame-Related (SR) and Trust-Violation-Related (TVR) Outcomes. In Stage III, MIOS total and subscale scores had strong convergent validity, and PMIE-endorsers had substantially higher MIOS scores vs. non-endorsers. We discuss and contextualize the results and describe research that is needed to substantiate these inaugural findings to further explore the validity of the MIOS and moral injury, in particular to examine discriminant and incremental validity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references55

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure.

            While considerable attention has focused on improving the detection of depression, assessment of severity is also important in guiding treatment decisions. Therefore, we examined the validity of a brief, new measure of depression severity. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) is a self-administered version of the PRIME-MD diagnostic instrument for common mental disorders. The PHQ-9 is the depression module, which scores each of the 9 DSM-IV criteria as "0" (not at all) to "3" (nearly every day). The PHQ-9 was completed by 6,000 patients in 8 primary care clinics and 7 obstetrics-gynecology clinics. Construct validity was assessed using the 20-item Short-Form General Health Survey, self-reported sick days and clinic visits, and symptom-related difficulty. Criterion validity was assessed against an independent structured mental health professional (MHP) interview in a sample of 580 patients. As PHQ-9 depression severity increased, there was a substantial decrease in functional status on all 6 SF-20 subscales. Also, symptom-related difficulty, sick days, and health care utilization increased. Using the MHP reinterview as the criterion standard, a PHQ-9 score > or =10 had a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 88% for major depression. PHQ-9 scores of 5, 10, 15, and 20 represented mild, moderate, moderately severe, and severe depression, respectively. Results were similar in the primary care and obstetrics-gynecology samples. In addition to making criteria-based diagnoses of depressive disorders, the PHQ-9 is also a reliable and valid measure of depression severity. These characteristics plus its brevity make the PHQ-9 a useful clinical and research tool.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychiatry
                Front Psychiatry
                Front. Psychiatry
                Frontiers in Psychiatry
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-0640
                05 July 2022
                2022
                : 13
                : 923928
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Psychiatry Department, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston University , Boston, MA, United States
                [2] 2Psychiatry Department, The MacDonald Franklin Operational Stress Injury Research Centre, University of Western Ontario , London, ON, Canada
                [3] 3King's Centre for Military Health Research, Kings College London , London, United Kingdom
                [4] 4Psychology Department, Phoenix Australia - Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health, University of Melbourne , Melbourne, VIC, Australia
                [5] 5VA Boston Healthcare System , Boston, MA, United States
                [6] 6Psychology Department, University of Ottawa , Ottawa, ON, Canada
                [7] 7Center of Excellence for Research on Returning War Veterans, Central Texas Veterans Health Care System , Temple, TX, United States
                [8] 8Psychology Department, Ariel University , Ariel, Israel
                [9] 9Behavioral Sciences Department, Ruppin Academic Center , Emek Hefer, Israel
                Author notes

                Edited by: Lorraine Alison Smith-MacDonald, University of Alberta, Canada

                Reviewed by: Brian Edward Engdahl, University of Minnesota Twin Cities, United States; Kathleen Ann Kendall-Tackett, Texas Tech University Health Science Center Amarillo, United States

                *Correspondence: Brett T. Litz litzb@ 123456bu.edu

                This article was submitted to Psychopathology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychiatry

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyt.2022.923928
                9297368
                35873252
                f0eef1c3-bc80-49d0-9299-a836d3585d78
                Copyright © 2022 Litz, Plouffe, Nazarov, Murphy, Phelps, Coady, Houle, Dell, Frankfurt, Zerach, Levi-Belz and the Moral Injury Outcome Scale Consortium.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 19 April 2022
                : 09 June 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 7, Equations: 0, References: 55, Pages: 16, Words: 14079
                Funding
                Funded by: Department of Veterans' Affairs, Australian Government, doi 10.13039/501100000938;
                Categories
                Psychiatry
                Original Research

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                moral injury syndrome,moral injury outcome scale,multinational,psychometric evaluation,moral injury outcome scale consortium

                Comments

                Comment on this article