Meta analysis N>25000: kappa between retrospective vs prospective reports of childhood maltreatment is 0.19.
"The 2 measures cannot be used interchangeably to study the associated health outcomes and risk mechanisms"
#measurementschmeasurement
“Agreement Between Prospective and Retrospective Measures of Childhood Maltreatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis” and accompanying editorial are available at #APAAM19 booth 1124 from @JAMAPsych
Prospective versus retrospective research on childhood maltreatment identify different groups meaning they cannot be used interchangeably to study associated outcomes/risks
Prospective versus retrospective research on childhood maltreatment identify different groups meaning they cannot be used interchangeably to study associated outcomes/risks ja.ma/2UMyQxNpic.twitter.com/83V6LhsBAQ
New meta-analysis on agreement b/w prospective and retrospective measures of child maltreatment (incl our 2008 paper) has some important methodological and conceptual conclusions about how we define and assess early adversity.
1/2 Big implications here for the #ACES checklist, supporting what many suspect: retrospective self-report of negative events correlates poorly with them actually occurring. @somedocs #psychtwitter @CoyneoftheRealmjamanetwork.com/journals/jamap… …
The assumption of equivalence. Research shows that prospective and retrospective measures of childhood trauma identify different individuals and cannot be used interchangeably. Both constructs are important and must be studied further